by Dr. Hermann E. Ott

FACET Commentary No. 27 – February 2011

Since the Copenhagen conference, climate negotiations have stalled. Immediately following Copenhagen many believed that the conference in Cancún would finally bring a legally binding global agreement, but soon afterwards hopes were pinned on the conference in South Africa 2011 or the “Rio +20” conference in 2012 to bring forth a final agreement… [READ FULL TEXT]

 The European Environment Agency (EEA) yesterday released its greenhouse gas inventory for 2008, showing a two-percent fall from 2007 levels across EU-27 countries and an 11.3-percent reduction from 1990 levels. The new data also show that the EU-15 (the 15 only EU members in 1997 when the Kyoto Protocol was negotiated) have reduced emissions by 6.9 percent since 1990, putting those countries on track to meet their Kyoto Protocol commitment of reducing 2008-2012 emissions by an average of 8-percent below 1990 levels. The European Commission points out that the EU-15 emission reduction—a 1.9-percent drop from 2007 to 2008—came as the region’s economy grew 0.6 percent, suggesting that economic growth and emissions cuts can be compatible.

Just last month, the European Commission had announced that emissions covered under the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) fell even more rapidly: verified emissions from covered installations were 11.6-percent lower last year than in 2008. EU Climate Action Commissioner Connie Hedegaard cautioned that these reductions are largely due to the economic crisis, as opposed to ambitious actions by covered industry. The crisis has also weakened price signals in the trading scheme and slowed business investment in emissions-reducing innovations.

Earlier this year, the European Commission began arguing that the Union should commit to deeper cuts than a 20-percent reduction from 1990 levels by 2020, calling instead for a 30-percent decrease. It released figures showing that, largely due to the economic crisis, the annual costs for cutting emissions will be lower than originally estimated by 2020. In 2008, the EU estimated that €70 billion per year would be necessary to meet the 20-percent target, but this cost estimate has now fallen to just €48 billion. For a 30-percent target during the same timeframe, the new projected annual cost is €81 billion—only €11 billion more than what EU countries have already accepted under the 20-percent target.

[Please read the rest of the blog on ReVolt]

Photo courtesy USFWS

The Canadian government didn’t win many fans at December’s Copenhagen climate summit. Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s administration staunchly opposed further emissions restrictions on his country, despite Canada’s failure to meet its Kyoto Protocol commitment of cutting fossil fuel emissions 5.2 percent below 1990 levels by 2008–12. Instead, domestic emissions escalated further.

Canada’s new target of reducing emissions 3 percent below 1990 levels by 2020 and 51–63 percent by 2050 is insufficient to prevent climate change from permanently altering the country’s northern backyard. Last week, the Arctic Council announced in its Arctic Species Trend Index, which the Canadian government funded, that High Arctic vertebrate species declined 26 percent between 1970 and 2004. Populations in more southern and marine Arctic ecosystems have experienced less dramatic changes, but climate change is clearly threatening the survival of polar wildlife, including in Canada. Arctic species are expected to be displaced as more southerly species encroach into warmer northern habitats, and polar ice melt threatens to further shrink Arctic habitats.

Harper’s administration seems increasingly uncommitted to supporting climate science. Its 2010 budget withholds funds to the Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences, a move that may reduce university-based climate science research by half, according to Climate Action Network (CAN) Canada. Government climate experts have been discouraged from speaking directly with the news media. And perhaps most disturbing, Harper has appointed three climate change skeptics to the boards of two key granting agencies for university-based research: the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council and the Canada Foundation for Innovation.

In a new CAN-Canada report that summarizes the Harper government’s approach to climate science, the authors write: “Overall, it is difficult not to arrive at the conclusion that the government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper sees climate change only as a political problem, not a real-world threat. And in order to reduce its political problem, the government seems quite willing to undermine scientific research and those who undertake it, in federal departments and Canadian universities.”

Later this month, the U.S.-based National Snow and Ice Data Center will announce its annual study of polar sea-ice extent, which will likely provide more troubling news about climate change’s effect on the Arctic. Let’s hope Mr. Harper takes notice. His government cannot neglect its responsibility to raise awareness about climate-related changes under way in the Arctic, and it must take action to lower emissions.

Ben Block is a staff journalist at the Worldwatch Institute in Washington, DC. Click here to read “Wildlife Declines Observed Across Arctic Region” in Worldwatch’s Eye on Earth news service.