Large document previews are not available on small devices. Please allow ample time for large documents to load. Thanks.
Comment: A global climate change emergency statement for COP28
“Humanity is conducting an unintended, uncontrolled, globally pervasive experiment whose ultimate consequence could be second only to a global nuclear war.”
Joan Russow Dec 2, 2023 4:00 AM
A commentary by the co-ordinator for Global Compliance Research Project. She attended COP15 in Copenhagen in 2009, climate conferences in Cancun and Bolivia in 2010, and COP21 in Paris 2015.
Recalling … that in 1988, at the Conference on the Changing Atmosphere in Toronto, 300 global scientists, along with other participants, concluded:
“Humanity is conducting an unintended, uncontrolled, globally pervasive experiment whose ultimate consequence could be second only to a global nuclear war. The Earth’s atmosphere is changed at an unprecedented rate by pollutants resulting from depositions of hazardous, toxic and atomic wastes and from wasteful fossil-fuel use.
- Comment: After a disastrous summer, make climate a priority
- As fossil fuel execs descend on U.N. climate summit, some ask ‘what are COPs about?’
“These changes represent a major threat to international security and are already having harmful consequences over many parts of the globe…. it is imperative to act now.”
The conference called for the global community to reduce CO2 emissions by about 20 per cent of 1988 levels by the year 2005 as an initial global goal.
“Clearly the industrialized nations have a responsibility to lead the way both through their national energy policies and their bilateral multilateral assistance arrangement.”
Aware … that in 1992, under article 4 of United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, developed states made a commitment to return to 1990 levels by 2000.
Recalling … that in September 2007, at the UN, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change chair Rajendra Pachauri supported moving from a meat-based diet to a plant-based diet.
Recalling … that in 2009 at an IPCC press conference at COP15, it was proclaimed that at a two-degree rise in temperature, the poor, the vulnerable and the disenfranchised would not survive, at 1.5, they might.
Aware … that in 2013, all member states adopted Sustainable Development Goal 13: “Climate change presents the single biggest threat to development, and its widespread, unprecedented impacts disproportionately burden the poorest and most vulnerable. Urgent action to combat climate change is needed.”
Appreciating … that in 2015, at COP21 in Paris, then-secretary general Ban Ki-Moon urged states to negotiate with a global vision, not with vested national interests
Welcoming … on Aug. 4, 2019 Secretary General Antonio Guterres stated: “We are facing a grave climate emergency. We need urgently to accelerate with Climate Action for the transformation the world needs. This is the battle of our lives. It is a battle we can win. It is a battle we must win.”
Deploring … the continued war between NATO and Russia and exacerbating the climate crisis.
Implementing Sustainable Development Goal 13, achieving a global vision, addressing the climate-change emergency, and keeping the rise in temperature below 1.5 Celsius would involve:
1. Fulfilling article 2: The ultimate objective the UNFCCC Convention and any related legal instruments that the Conference of the Parties may adopt is to achieve stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.
2. Being determined to protect the rights of future generations, and to invoking the precautionary principle — “where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage from climate change, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing such measures to prevent the threat” — and enforce the pollution-pay principle.
3. Supporting the principle of common and differentiated responsibility, compensating for historical emissions (loss and damage), and instituting a fair and just transition for workers and communities affected negatively by the new vision.
4. Ending subsidies for fossil fuel, and the investment in fossil fuels.
5. Ending fossil-fuel exploration, production and distribution through infrastructure such as pipelines and tankers and closing LNG ports.
6. Conserving carbon sinks, such as old growth forests and bogs, planting trees, ensuring food security and strengthening conservation of biodiversity.
7. Promoting nature-based solutions, including moving away from car dependency and instituting socially equitable and environmentally sound public transit and energy such as solar, wind, tidal and geothermal, and avoiding all false solutions such as nuclear, geo-engineering, fracking and biofuels.
8. Reducing the global military budget by 75 per cent, signing and ratifying the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, ending the exemption of greenhouse gases emanating from militarism, and transferring the savings to address the climate-change emergency.
9. Making a commitment to use the baseline of 1990, and given the climate-change emergency, to use timelines and targets reflecting existing and emerging science such as 50 per cent below 1990 levels by 2025, 75 per cent below 1990 levels by 2030, 100 per cent below 1990 level by 2040 and decarbonization with 100 per cent ecologically sound renewable energy by 2050.
10. Revoking the call for “net zero” because the call condones business as usual with increasingly dubious offsets.
11. Addressing the climate change emergency would also require, in each article, a striving for consensus with a fallback of 75 per cent without compromising the developing countries.
12. Seeking an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice on whether the developed states have failed to comply with the objective of the UNFCCC and have not prevented dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.
13. Ratifying the UN treaty on the prohibition of nuclear weapons whose use would cause a humanitarian and ecological catastrophe.
14. Concurring with a number of states about the accreditation and dominance of the fossil-fuel companies.
2009 Copenhagen COP 15; they are playing with numbers while Africa is dying
2009 Copenhagen COP 15; they are playing with numbers while Africa is dying
PEJnews- Joan Russow Global Compliance Research Project
Developed States must follow the lead of the Developing StatesDr Victor A. Fodeke, at a press conference stated “they are playing with numbers while Africa is dying”. At Copenhagen COP 15 Developing countries are really standing up to the developed countries. The developed states often claim they are following the science. The science, however, related to climate change is evolving. At a press conference by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the spokesperson stated that at a rise of 2 degrees from pre-industrial levels would result in the poor and the vulnerable not surviving. At another Press Conference the spokesperson for the World Meteorological Organization, in releasing its most recent report, indicated that the temperature is increasing more rapidly than anticipated and that climate-associated disasters are occurring more severely and more often. The scientists are speaking out, the urgency is acknowledged, and inaction by the developed states is gross negligence.
The US chief negotiator Todd Stern rejected the need to pay its climate debt. In response to Stern’s rejection Pablo Solon, Bolivia’s ambassador to the United Nations said the following:
“Admitting responsibility for the climate crisis without taking necessary actions to address it is like someone burning your house and then refusing to pay for it. Even if the fire was not started on purpose, the industrialized countries, through their inaction, have continued to add fuel to the fire. As a result, they have used up two thirds of the atmospheric space; depriving us of the necessary space for our development and provoking a climate crisis of huge proportions.“It is entirely unjustifiable that countries like Bolivia are now forced to pay for the crisis. This creates a huge draw on our limited resources to protect our people from a crisis created by the rich and their over-consumption.
“In Bolivia, we are facing a crisis we had no role in causing. Our glaciers dwindle, droughts become ever more common, and water supplies are drying up. Who should address this? To us it seems only right that the polluter should pay, and not the poor.”
The Global Humanitarian Forum Climate Change Human Impact report that summarized data including that issued by WHO on the impacts states that in 2009, 325 million people were seriously affected by climate change (based on negative health outcomes), and there were 303,000 deaths as a result of climate change. It predicts that in 2030, 660 million people a year will be affected by climate change and that 471,500 people will die from climate change. 98% of those affected and 99% of deaths come from the developing world. The start year for the data is 1980 in terms of impacts. That equates to nearly 13 million deaths by 2030, and billions affected. This period is merely the start of the climate change impact. Without action the deaths will increase exponentially after climate change takes grip in post 2030. This disregard for the lives of others is paramount to criminal negligence.
The UNFCCC is ratified by 192 countries – representing near universal membership – it commands near universal support and its legitimacy is unquestioned. The UNFCCC stated: “stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere must be at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. This level equates to a target of below 1°C, which is the point at which global systems on land, water and air will be so affected as to create vicious feedback cycles and destabilize many ecosystems and human societies.
Because of the global urgency, there must be the political will to strive to contain the rise in temperature to less than 1°C above pre-industrial levels. Strict time frames must be imposed, so that overall global emissions will begin to be reversed as of 2010. There must be a global target of 30% below 1990 levels by 2015, 50% below by 2020, 75% by 2030, 85% by 2040 and 100% below by 2050; while adhering to the precautionary principle, and differentiated responsibility principle [the emission debt owed by Developed countries to developing countries has to be seriously addressed]. Under the Framework Convention, every state signatory incurred the obligation to conserve carbon sinks; thus the destruction of sinks, including deforestation and elimination of bogs must end.
At COP 15 Developing countries are really standing up to the developed countries
The Developing States are now calling for the stabilization of temperature from anthropogenic activities to be below 1.5 degree centigrade, and some are calling for the rise to be below 1 degree Centigrade. The Developing States are calling for maintaining the parts per million to below 300ppm.
The Developing states are demanding that states fulfill their longstanding commitment to transfer .7% of GDP to overseas development, but this commitment should not be undermined by the allocation of funds to address climate change. There must be additional funds. Many call for a new fund not the Bretons Wood fund to be set up.
The G77 chair representing 140 countries, called upon Obama to proceed with the same ease with which he moves 200 billion into militarism to commit 200 billion to assist the developing states.
While at the United States Press Conference the Spokesperson stated that there was little chance that there would be any more than a political agreement, the developing states are demanding a legally binding document to come out of Copenhagen.
The developing states speak with passion about climate change; for them the outcome of climate change is an issue of survival. They are the ones that are already experiencing the serious impacts. They will be the ones who will be forced to migrate.
Will their plea be heard? Will Obama translate his Nobel laureate Peace prize into not just more good intentions but into real action, and embark upon a strong commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emission to 40% below 1990 levels, and to even contemplate reallocation a significant portion of the US annual military budget.