Climate change conferences
From RIO to Cancun
In December, 2010, the last UN Climate change conference was held in Cancun, Mexico. It dealt with the problem of the greenhouse effect. Before we discuss whether it was a success or a failure, some background information will be useful. First of all, what do we really understand by the term “greenhouse effect”? “Greenhouse effect” is the heating process of the earth due to the presence of greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide is an important component of these gases). The earth receives sunlight, which is absorbed by its surface, and re-radiates some of this energy as thermal radiation. The greenhouse gases in the atmosphere absorb the outgoing radiated energy and re-remit some of it back towards the earth. Thus, the presence of the atmospheric greenhouse gases results in the surface receiving more radiation than it would if the atmosphere were absent; and it is thus warmer than it would be. Although the mechanism to retain heat is different in case of real greenhouses, the heating process of the earth due to the presence of atmospheric gases is named by analogy to greenhouses. The greenhouse effect in itself is not a problem for humanity. In fact, if the earth's surface was not covered by a blanket of greenhouse gases, (carbon dioxide, water vapour and a few other minor gases) life on earth would not exist. It becomes a problem when there is a process of “accelerated warming of earth's surface due to anthropogenic (human activity-related) releases of greenhouse gases due to industrial activity and deforestation.” This accelerated warming is also known as global warming. The emission of excessive greenhouse gases is intricately related to industrial activity. Carbon dioxide and methane are emitted as a result of fossil-fuel burning. Cars, trucks, power plants, steel mills, farms, planes, cement factories home furnaces etc.virtually all of them spew carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Although it is difficult to assess the exact impact of global warming, there is a consensus of opinion that if the current trend in the emission of greenhouse gases continues, natural and agricultural ecosystems will be substantially altered. There will also be significant impacts on human and animal health. Due to the rapid melting of polar ice, sea levels will rise. Coastal areas of Bangladesh and the nearby islands will most probably disappear under water. Since industrial activities have brought material progress and well-being to mankind, the problem we face is: How to reduce greenhouse gas emissions while continuing with industrial activities? This is a global problem. Since no one nation single-handedly can do much to counteract the greenhouse gas build-up in the atmosphere we must deal with the problem on a global basis. The first such attempt was made at the Earth Summit held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in 1992. It was truly an international conference, and was attended by 117 heads of states and representatives from 178 nations. Among the many treaties and conventions that came out of the conference, the one that drew most attention was the Framework Convention on Climate Change (also known as the Global warming Convention). Although the treaty did not set binding targets for emission reductions on carbon dioxide, methane and other greenhouse gases, the signatories agreed to reduce their emissions. Another convention, called Agenda 21, “outlined global strategies for cleaning up the environment and encouraging environmentally sound” economic development. Although these were considered to be noble objectives by all the participants, there were significant discrepancies about the manner the recommendations should be implemented. The less industrialised countries of the South were not prepared to accept emission restrictions imposed by the heavily industrialised North unless they received adequate compensation from the North. A second meeting of the FCCC (Framework Convention on Climate Change) was held in Kyoto in Japan in 1997 with the objective of setting gas emission targets that would be binding under international law. The target set by the Kyoto Protocol for the industrialised countries was a 5.2% reduction in overall greenhouse gas emissions by 2010 relative to 1990.No mandatory targets were set for the developing countries. The target for the EU was an 8% reduction, the US 7% and Japan 6%. In order to make the proposals more attractive to the rich nations, the Kyoto Protocol introduced a curious carbon trading system. Since a tonne of gas causes the same damage to the global environment, no matter where it is emitted, the US, for example could keep its high compliance costs down by paying for the low compliance costs in say, a country in Eastern Europe, and obtaining paper credit for the amount of emission reductions, which could then be set against the target for the US. So, 13 years after the adoption of this ambitious project, what is the situation today? Since 1997 many FCCC conferences have been heldwith some more successful than the others. Unfortunately, there has been little effective change. If the main objective of the Kyoto Protocol was to reduce the carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere, the net result of all these negotiations, as measured by the Keeling Curve, has been negative. It shows that the gas is rising continuously over time. In December 2010, the machines at the Mauna Loa Observatory in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, which collects data for the Keeling Curve, indicated that the carbon dioxide level at that moment had reached 390 (it was 350 in 1990) So, in light of this terrible verdict on the world's efforts to reduce carbon emissions, it is fair to ask: Did we make any progress at Cancun? Yes, we made progress but only modest ones. A pledge to create a climate fund for the developing countries was given at Cancun, which would provide $100 billion a year to help pay for emission cuts and climate adaptation like sea rise and drought by 2020. A deal was arranged to reward countries for lowering rates of deforestation. It also created new mechanisms for the transfer of clean energy technology. This is certainly good news for countries like Bangladesh and island nations. The Cancun agreement gave another year to its participants to decide whether to extend Kyoto Protocol, which is scheduled to expire in 2012. No doubt, all this is good news. But unfortunately, the world's largest emitters, the US and China managed to remain outside the Kyoto Protocol. So what is the conclusion? Conferences like the one held at Cancun give useful opportunities for bilateral and multilateral discussions. But the truth is that until and unless the US, China and other industrialised countries take tough measures to reduce carbon emissions, no good news will come out of the Mauna Loa Observatory and the carbon level will continue to rise.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments