With rebranding effort, senators give hope for carbon regulation

March 3rd, 2010 by vdavis No comments »

Last year we were surprised to see climate legislation make it through the House by June and a Senate bill introduced by October. Of course, we weren’t optimistic the Senate bill would go anywhere before the U.N. climate change conference we attended in Copenhagen. And after the disappointing outcome there and seeing how the health care reform controversy has monopolized Washington’s attention, we didn’t expect to hear much out of Congress on climate anytime soon.

So we were surprised when news began to percolate last week about a revised Senate climate bill that tosses out “cap-and-trade” terminology, now virtually a dirty word on Capitol Hill, in favor of a new carbon pricing mechanism that will phase in different emissions caps for different industry sectors, starting with utilities and eventually going into effect for large emitters from industry.

Three senators — John Kerry (D-Mass.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) — have been working for months on the plan whose goal is reducing greenhouse gases by 2020 in the range of 17 percent below 2005 levels, and the trio is meeting privately this week with colleagues and floating the trial balloon in the press.

Cap-and-trade already exists in the United States for sulfur dioxide, the pollutant linked to acid rain. The largest cap-and-trade system for greenhouse gases in the world is currently the European Union Emission Trading System, and some have called it a failure in achieving its goals.

Where would the carbon revenue raised go under the new Senate plan? One potential recipient is the Highway Trust Fund, according to Senate aides. This fund does have a mass transit account, which we hope would be the destination, because, while highways certainly need to be maintained, wouldn’t it be smarter to route the money from a carbon fee toward a system that would help Americans drive less?

Reports today say that big oil — namely, ConocoPhillips, BP America, and Exxon Mobil Corp — prefers the new pricing plan, also being called a “transportation fuel fee,” to the economy-wide nature of cap-and-trade. Opponents of the plan are mostly those who oppose any regulation at all, and more will surely surface once details emerge. But we’re surprised to hear the word “climate” uttered in a supportive way on Capitol Hill at all, and so far reports make us cautiously optimistic. A poll conducted in December shows that U.S. voters prefer a “carbon tax” over “cap-and-trade,” 58 percent to 27 percent.

Last week Sen. Graham told The New York Times’ Thomas Friedman, “We can’t be a nation that always tries and fails. We have to eventually get some hard problem right.” Here’s to that! —Valerie Davis and Avrel Seale


A Report from Belgium: Reducing Computer Energy Consumption While Creating Economic Opportunity

February 24th, 2010 by The Green Detectives No comments »

By Jessica Repa

As the Conservation Marketing Director at EnviroMedia, part of my role is to help develop Jessica Repa at Euro Green ITstrategic alliances for our client, Climate Savers Computing Initiative, an international nonprofit started by Google and Intel and dedicated to reducing the energy consumption of computers. A key priority for Climate Savers Computing Initiative in 2010 is to develop strategic alliances in geographic regions to improve energy efficiency and reduce energy consumption caused by the use of computers on a global scale.

I recently had the opportunity to travel to Brussels, Belgium, on behalf of Climate Savers Computing to speak during a press briefing for the Euro Green IT Innovation Center, a public-private partnership and nonprofit association created to increase awareness about the intersection of Information and Communication Technologies (“ICT”) and Sustainable Development in the Walloon region in Belgium. Climate Savers Computing helped launch the Euro Green IT Innovation Center with the Walloon Region in Belgium, along with Alcatel-Lucent, CISCO, IBM and Microsoft. The strategic alliance includes an education campaign to reduce the energy consumption of computers and pilot projects to showcase how the use of technology can help drive innovation and energy savings.

FB02in het IBM Forum_small

Photo: IBM

During my presentation, I discussed Climate Savers Computing and ICT for Sustainable Development. Other speakers including Jacques Platieau, General Manager Benelux, IBM Global Business Services, Pol Vanbiervliet, CEO Cisco Belgium, Jean-Claude Marcourt, Minister of Economy, Walloon Region, Elio Di Rupo, Mayor of Mons, Belgium, Georges Campioli, Managing Director, Agoria Walloon – Trade Federation, and Xavier Lamote, Director of Business & Marketing Microsoft Belux.  The public-private partnership in the Walloon region in Belgium will enable our client to collaborate with political leaders, local and international companies, academic institutions and individuals in the region to develop innovative solutions to energy-efficient computing. The partnership expects to create jobs in a region once rich with industrial jobs. As in Detroit and Steel Belt towns such as Pittsburgh, the focus in Wallonia has recently turned from heavy industrial to small and medium-sized startup businesses, thanks in part to government and private funding.  By working with an alliance of stakeholders in Walloon, our client hopes to have an immediate impact in the region by measurably reducing the energy consumption of computers and helping create economic opportunities.

While on the other side of the pond, I also had the opportunity to meet with other individuals and organizations involved with environmental policy developments in Europe. For example, I met with journalist Ewald Koenig, editor-in-chief of EurActiv Germany in Berlin, whose office had a view of the Bundespressekonferenz (Federal Press Conference), JessNearPressConferenceBerlina conference center where leading representatives from politics, economics, and culture meet regularly with the press. He pointed out a dull line on the floor where the heavy Berlin Wall once stood, now surrounded by light streaming in from the windows. The faded line reminded me that our “Change Starts Here” motto at EnviroMedia is a timeless and global message.  The past should inform the future, and we can’t make progress without groundbreaking change.

UN Climate Chief Resigns; May Help Negotiations

February 19th, 2010 by ktuerff No comments »

yvo_podium_600

When things get really chaotic in public companies, often the only solution is for the CEO to go. Yvo de Boer, executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), announced he will resign from his position, effective July 1. The resignation won’t be an immediate “game-changer,” but a fresh face with better relationships with developing countries should help international climate negotiations. A chasm between rich and poor countries prohibited the development of a global climate treaty in Copenhagen.

According to a UNFCCC news release, Mr. de Boer said, “It was a difficult decision to make, but I believe the time is ripe for me to take on a new challenge, working on climate and sustainability with the private sector and academia.”

We heard Mr. de Boer speak in person several times, most recently at Copenhagen Business Day.  The event was organized by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) and International Chamber of Commerce, held in conjunction with COP 15. He seemed exhausted and frustrated from repeatedly giving advice to leaders for the best path forward, with little to show for it. It’s ironic Mr. de Boer took business leaders to task that day, complaining that they communicate climate issues with government policy makers better on a national level than globally. Mr. de Boer has accepted a gig with with KPMG as global adviser on climate and sustainability, so we’ll see if he leads by example in global business communications. Dealing with the cards he was dealt by global political leaders, I give him high marks for his five years of leadership at the United Nations.

Mr. de Boer intends to help negotiations move forward ahead of the Climate Change Conference in Mexico in November. After the lackluster results of the Copenhagen Accord, some politicians lost hope the United Nations was the right vehicle for achieving a global agreement to reduce greenhouse gases. Perhaps de Boer’s resignation will allow the UNFCCC one more chance.

Our Favorite Green Things

February 9th, 2010 by kjung 1 comment »

If I could only save three things from my house, they would be, predictably, the family photo albums, my great-grandfather’s violin, and in third place, probably my Yankee screwdriver. If you’re not familiar with the Yankee, it’s a beautiful monument to American ingenuity that prefigures the cordless drill/screwdriver. Push on the handle and the head automatically rotates. Flip a switch, and your screw reverses with every push.

Ever since boyhood, I’ve been fascinated by simple machines. Growing up in the ’70s and ’80s, when sturdy steel tools that would last a lifetime had given way to cheap plastic parts and power everything, there was just something so elegant and clever about granddad’s tools left over from the day: The hand-crank drill. The hand jigsaw. The Yankee screwdriver. I inherited some of them. The cheapo power tools I bought in young adulthood are long gone, but these bad boys aren’t, and I use them more all the time.

Low-Carbon — If Not Low-Calorie — Ice Cream

Low-Carbon — If Not Low-Calorie — Ice Cream

Maybe my love for anachronistic technology is proof I simply was born too late, but I’ve always felt there’s real genius in these inventions, complex enough to greatly leverage human power but sturdy enough to survive a lifetime of falls from the workbench to the garage floor. For 25 years, I’ve periodically fantasized about opening a store that sold only these tools. In my daydreams, the store is called “Lo-Tech Solutions,” and with a small but steady stream of like-minded tool nerds for customers, it stands in proud, quixotic defiance of a world enthralled by the cheap and easy.

This week, my dream comes true. Sort of.

To mark EnviroMedia’s 13th anniversary, we polled our staff to discover their favorite green products — gizmos that speak to EnviroMedians’ shared passion for the environment. And since all of these items have an impact on energy use, directly or indirectly (it takes a lot of energy to move tap water — and garbage trucks), they’re all partial solutions to climate change. We were looking for things 1. people actually owned and used that were 2. high-quality and 3.) relatively affordable. We picked 13 products (marking 13 years) to comprise the inaugural list of “Our Favorite Green Things.” These aren’t items we’re selling, mind you, but we are holding them up as great ideas to make your household more eco-friendly, and we’re providing links to where you can buy them.

And while some of them are “low-tech solutions” — such as the beloved hand-crank ice cream freezer over which my three boys fight for the next turn, a sweet push-reel mower, and (one of my favorites) a low-impact woodland home (it doesn’t get more old-school than this) — others are decidedly not low-tech, like a front-loading clothes washer my great-grandmother would have killed someone for, or a solar-powered floodlight, or even a Ford Escape hybrid. Going green doesn’t mean going back, though it wouldn’t kill most of us to use a little more elbow grease and a little less coal-fired electricity now and again, either.

So have fun exploring our new “store,” and check back for additions in the future. Maybe the next list of Our Favorite Things will even include the Yankee screwdriver. (But you can’t have mine.) —Avrel Seale

P.S. Almost forgot the song . . .

Solar-pow’red flood lights, hand-crank ice cream freezers

Push-reel lawn mowers and “Kill-A-Watt” meters

Plastic water bottles that aren’t what you think

Rocket Shower helps you work out and not stink

(mm-pum-pum, mm-pum-pum, mm-pum-pum, mm-pum-pum)

Panniers that keep your bicycle so stable

Compost bags that are so biodegradable

Hobbit holes just like in Lord of the Rings

These are a few of Our Favorite Things…

(big finish)

When you waste power

Take a long shower

Your utilities are obsceeeene

Then simply click through to “Our Favorite Things”

And then you will beeeee … (wait for it)

Sooooo greeeen!

Copenhagen Accord Barely Alive As Deadline Passes

January 31st, 2010 by ktuerff 2 comments »
Valerie Davis and Kevin Tuerff attended COP 15 as delegates.

Valerie Davis and Kevin Tuerff attended COP 15 as delegates.

U.N. deadline passes with mixed results; Mexico prepares to try again for global climate treaty

Fifty-five of the 193 countries that participated in the U.N. climate summit in Copenhagen have submitted their emission-reduction plans by the January 31 deadline. Without India and China submitting plans, the Copenhagen Accord is on “life support” as a tool for reducing global greenhouse gases. However, the United States and most of the biggest polluting nations submitted their commitments to the United Nations.

“It’s a soft deadline,” explained Yvo de Boer, executive secretary of the United Nations Framework on Climate Change. “If countries follow up the outcomes of Copenhagen calmly, with eyes firmly on the advantage of collective action, they have every chance of completing the job,” he said.

President Barack Obama worked with other world leaders to negotiate the outcome of COP 15 in Copenhagen last month. We participated in the event as business delegates, and blogged at http://www.GreenDetectives.net.

Feb 4 UPDATE: Todd Stern, the US Special Envoy for Climate Change, issued a statement about the results: “We are pleased to be among 55 countries – including all of the world’s major economies — that have submitted pledges to limit or reduce their greenhouse gas emissions under the Copenhagen Accord. These countries represent nearly 80% of global emissions. In supporting the Accord, we are taking an important step in the global effort to combat climate change.”

“In addition to the countries that have submitted targets or actions, a number of others have conveyed their support for the Accord. We urge all countries to join this broad coalition by promptly conveying their support for the Accord to the UNFCCC Secretariat.”

“The Copenhagen Accord includes important advances on funding, technology, forestry, adaptation and transparency. The United States is committed to working with our partners around the world to make the Accord operational and to continue the effort to build a strong, science-based, global regime to combat the profound threat of climate change.” (From US State Department)

This could be interpreted to mean: sign up for the accord, or no financial aid from the U.S.

Behind the U.N. and U.S. spin of the final outcome for the accord is a valley of discontent between developed and developing countries. Some believe the differences are so great that the largest countries should try to fix the climate problem on their own. Others want to give UNFCCC negotiations a chance, with up to five more negotiating sessions this year, concluding in late November at COP 16 in Cancún, Mexico.

Copenhagen Accord Greenhouse Gas Reduction Goals by 2020
According to news reports, these large countries reported these emission-reduction commitments from 2005 levels. Check here or come back to GreenDetectives.net for updates.

Country     % Reduction  % of Global Pollution
Australia                        5                      1.3
Brazil                            20                     6.6
Canada                         17                      2
European Union            20**                 15
Indonesia                     26                     4.7
Japan                            25**                 4
United States              17                     18
** by 1990 levels

China, the world’s largest emitter (generating 22 percent of global emissions), said publicly it would reduce its carbon intensity by at least 40 percent (a different measure) while allowing overall emissions to increase. India (6 percent) pledged a 20-25 percent reduction of 2005 emissions.

U.S. negotiators in Copenhagen were trying to encourage countries to sign the accord, dangling a $10 billion carrot of financial aid from the United States and others. The money would be used for climate adaptation and mitigation.

“The proof of their commitment, their credentials will be demonstrated if the $10 billion flows as promised,” said, Jairam Ramesh, India’s Environment Minister. “If it doesn’t, we would believe that developed countries aren’t serious about climate change.”

Picture 3Mexico willing to lead

COP 16 moved to Cancún

Mexican president Felipe Calderón sees a problem with the dispute between poor countries and rich countries. Calling it a false dilemma, he says, “It’s as if we were in an airplane that has serious problems, and there is a terrible dispute between the passengers of first class and tourist class.”

At the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, last week, Calderón said, “My perception is lack of consensus is related to economic problems in each nation. There are huge economic costs associated with the tasks to cope with climate change.”

Noting the climate financing proposals from developed countries are probably not enough, he urges good-faith negotiations to move forward. He appears ready to try to be the bridge builder between rich and poor. For Calderón, COP 16 is both a logistical and political challenge. However, a successful outcome could bring dramatic changes to improve Mexico’s global image.

It’s interesting to note the Mexican government has moved the climate conference from the polluted Mexico City, to the beautiful resort area of Cancún. The beaches and crashing waves should provide a better backdrop for the conference than Denmark’s frigid temperatures and snow. Face it: global warming conferences should only be held in regions where it’s warm in December. And the Yucatan has faced more than its share of disasters due in part to rising ocean temperatures, including hurricanes and dying coral reefs offshore.

Perhaps Americans will pay more attention because of their proximity to and familiarity with Cancún, but I doubt it. No worries, the Green Detectives will be there. And we’ll continue following the climate issue here throughout 2010. –Kevin Tuerff

Millions burn lamp oil for light; U.S. nudges change with solar l.E.D. lamps

January 23rd, 2010 by ktuerff No comments »

We saw this presentation by Energy Secretary Steven Chu in the Bella Center, in Copenhagen last month. The video shows the night sky across the earth, and the disparity between where the most energy is used, versus population centers.

Picture 1

Secretary Chu was announcing a $100 million Climate REDI (Renewables and Efficient Deployment Initative), an international climate adaptation aid package, including a technology transfer grant for poor countries whose populations still use lamp oil to light their homes. As Americans, we often take basic electricity for granted. Fuel-based lighting is inefficient, provides limited and poor quality light, and exposes users to significant health and fire hazards. Burning the hurricane lamps and wick lamps indoors causes large numbers of premature death from indoor air pollution.

To promote solar and LED programs, the Climate REDI fund is supporting the Lighting Africa initiative, TERI’s Lighting a Billion Lives program, and the U.S. Department of Energy’s Lumina Project.

Lighting_Africa_Students

The funding will help develop best practices and efficiency standards for solar-powered LED lamps, which should drive down the cost to around ten dollars each. Cutting the price is seen as a critical step toward broad implementation.

For all the complex, expensive climate solutions like carbon sequestration, there are some simple, affordable solutions that reduce pollution while providing millions of poor families across the world with the basics like lighting and water.

Environmental woes exacerbate Haiti catastrophe

January 20th, 2010 by aseale No comments »

At first glance, it might seem the earthquake and humanitarian catastrophe in Haiti have nothing to do with climate change and deforestation. But while climate change certainly didn’t cause the devastating quake, unsustainable practices dating back more than 200 years have magnified the scope of the disaster.

If poverty can be considered a sustainability issue, then this issue was at the root of many thousands of deaths and injuries. Just as with the mud houses in Pakistan and Iran that collapsed in earthquakes in recent years killing tens of thousands, when natural disasters strike, the death toll is often a function both of the phenomenon itself but also of poorly constructed buildings that are a result of poverty.

This poverty in Haiti, which flows from a textbook constellation of social justice issues — from slavery to oligarchic corruption to lack of education — has been greatly compounded by an age-long squandering of Haiti’s natural resources.

Many of Haiti’s native forests — its remaining evidence just across the border in the Dominican Republic, with which it shares the island of Hispaniola — were cut to plant sugarcane and other crops under French colonial rule. Its most valuable timber was shipped to Europe. And because of Haiti’s poverty, many of its citizens now cut down the few trees left for firewood. Today, while the Dominican Republic retains 28 percent of its original forests, Haiti is down to 1 percent. It probably is not coincidence that per capita income in the Dominican Republic is some five times greater than in Haiti. The reasons for this disparity are many, but it’s not hard to see that deforestation is both a cause and an effect of poverty.

Without its trees, Haiti’s soil is free to blow or wash away, and what is left is nutrient poor and yields less to a people who rely heavily on subsistence farming. This poverty leads to a self-reinforcing menu of woes and makes any nation more susceptible to the corruption that has marked Haiti’s history. What’s more, deforestation greatly increases the likelihood of catastrophic mudslides once the rainy season arrives.

And while sustainability issues like deforestation have contributed to Haiti’s poverty generally, many of those same issues are now impeding its recovery directly. Perhaps the most dire need at this time is fresh water. Trees in large numbers are a critical player in the whole hydraulic cycle. With their roots, they keep the water table high and accessible. As they hold soil in place, they keep rivers and streams from becoming muddy. And their amazing root systems filter out numerous impurities. In large enough numbers, trees even make it rain.

With its largest city in ruins, thousands of former urban Haitians naturally are returning to the countryside for subsistence living — a countryside bereft of trees with poor soil and inadequate water. While more abundant fresh water in Haiti wouldn’t have necessarily quenched the thirst and met the medical needs of victims in the immediate aftermath, the less water aid workers have to ship in, the more they can concentrate on other supplies like food, medicine, and blood.

While we do whatever we can to improve the situation of those whom the earthquake of 2010 spared, we do well also to glean from the tragedy whatever lessons we can about how centuries-long unsustainable practices have exacerbated the catastrophe.

An ecologically sound Haiti still would have been hit by the earthquake, and it would have been devastating. But with a more prosperous population, more buildings would have withstood the quake, and fewer people would have died. And in a more forested Haiti, the survivors would have had more fresh water, a more fertile countryside to welcome the city’s refugees, and more stable hillsides if, God forbid, the aftershocks continue, especially in the rainy season.

Our thoughts and prayers are with the people of Haiti and with the global community of rescue and aid workers who are supporting them. And our dollars too. By matching employee contributions, EnviroMedia Social Marketing is sending more than $4,600 to Haiti relief efforts, $2,000 of that directed to the United Nations Foundation. —Avrel Seale, EnviroMedia

A new, clean alternative to boiling water with firewood

January 19th, 2010 by aseale 1 comment »

The burning of firewood throughout the developing world is a double-whammy for climate change. The first whammy is cutting down the trees (which absorb carbon); the second whammy is burning them, which releases their carbon into the atmosphere.

One of the biggest uses for wood fires around the world is purifying water — for drinking, for cooking, for bathing, and for laundry. In sub-Saharan Africa, as many as three out of four people purify their water by using solid fuel like wood, charcoal, kerosene, or coal to boil it.

The Solvatten Safe Water System

The Solvatten Safe Water System

Now, a Swedish company, Solvatten, has invented a machine that purifies water using solar power. The Solvatten Safe Water System, a portable, 10-liter container, uses a combination of solar power, filtration, and UV rays to purify the water, a process that takes between two and six hours, depending on the weather. An indicator tells the user when the water is pure.

The World Wildlife Federation has selected Solvatten as a “Climate Solver.”

The company’s web site says, “Solvatten AB is looking for customers and partners for projects to provide safe drinking water in a sustainable way. We are taking orders for units to be shipped from spring 2010.  Sales will be in batches of at least 72 units and customers distributing to developing countries will be prioritised.”

Haiti could certainly make quick use of tens of thousands of these units, as could remote communities around the world.

For purchasing information, e-mail info@solvatten.se.

5 research profs: Prepare Texans for Climate Change

January 14th, 2010 by ktuerff No comments »

What do you get when you put together a Longhorn, Aggie and Red Raider researchers? A really strong idea for a climate consortium in Texas. It’s no joke. Professor Jay Banner, a friend of EnviroMedia, and four other prominent climate researchers from UT-Austin, Texas A&M and Texas Tech penned an opinion piece that was printed in the Houston Chronicle, Austin American Statesman, Fort Worth Star-Telegram, San Angelo Standard-Times and others.  Note the opinions expressed in the op-ed are as individuals, and do not represent their institutions.

Prepare Texans for Climate Change

by Jay Banner, Charles Jackson, Katharine Hayhoe, Gerald North and Liang Yang

Our atmosphere and climate are changing in unprecedented ways, due in part, to human activity. Population is also expanding; Texas is home to four of the top 10 fastest-growing cities in the United States. The natural landscape is becoming increasingly urbanized. At the same time, our demand for water, land, and other natural resources is increasing. All of these issues raise concerns about what our future may hold.

Projections of future climate can be made using computer models of the climate system that take into account both natural and human effects on our world. The models predict a much drier Texas, particularly in the western half of the state, on par with or even exceeding 10-30 year ‘megadroughts’ of past centuries. These changes carry potentially enormous implications for Texas’ agriculture, wildlife, water, infrastructure, public health, businesses, and energy use. Consequences include lower stream and lake levels, water shortages, and growing competition between urban, rural, and industrial users.

During the 1950s, Texas experienced a seven year drought that was part of a larger dry spell that gripped the Great Plains and the American Southwest.  As a result, 244 of the 254 counties in Texas were declared federal disaster areas. During the last ice age around 20,000 years ago, mineral deposits — forming from water dripping deep into Texas caves — typically grew 10 to 100 times faster than they do today, indicating that Texas was a much rainier region during the last ice age. In the more recent past, trees in central and West Texas leave a record in their rings of multiple megadroughts since the 13th century. Scientists link the rainy ice ages and megadroughts of the past to cyclical shifts in Earth’s orbit and natural cycles such as El Niño.

Our ability to predict changes in Texas’ future climate will meet continuing challenges and there will be uncertainty about how the state should plan for the changes. The likelihood of some effects is becoming clear, however, with improved consensus from the scientific community. For example, projections are consistent that the American Southwest will likely become drier throughout this century, marking a transition to a new average climate for the western part of Texas similar to the drought of the 1950’s. It is uncertain exactly when the transition would occur, although some projections suggest that this transition is already underway.

We propose that Texas needs to take three key steps in the near future to address the risks associated with future change. First, assemble the best climate change information that currently exists. Second, improve this information through further research. And lastly, identify information gaps and uncertainties, and determine how to use the best information to plan for the changes.

There is currently no coordinated effort in the state of Texas to fill these needs. This is in contrast to the global consortium of experts that constitutes the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC); state-level efforts such as in California, which has a branch of its Energy Commission dedicated to quantifying climate change impacts and possible adaptation strategies; and municipal efforts such as in Chicago, which has a city-wide Climate Action Plan that includes estimates of future costs. To better understand the risks that Texas may face in the future, and how best to respond to changing risk, we propose that Texas draw on its depth of knowledge to establish its own expert consortium of scientists, policy makers, resource managers, state agency representatives, educators, and stakeholders.

A climate consortium for Texas could conduct the following essential functions:

• Bring together leading experts and stakeholders to determine the top concerns about how climate change may impact Texas.

• Quantify uncertainties of future changes, so that the state can determine how to best plan investments for adaptation and for research to reduce uncertainty.

• Prioritize areas for new research; for example, generation of high-resolution climate projections for regions within Texas, and the response of aquifers, streams, soils, and air quality to changing climate.

• Summarize the latest scientific data for policy makers with accurate quantification of uncertainties.

• Compare the costs to Texas of acting vs. the costs of not acting.

As world leaders work to build global accord on climate change, and as other states and regions are enacting their own legislation regarding greenhouse gas emissions, Texas needs to lead in determining what climate change will mean for Texans and what we should do about it. We are fortunate to have leading researchers, planners and policy makers in our state’s institutions, agencies and businesses, and we should take advantage of these resources by bringing them together to help address this important challenge.

Banner and Yang are Professors and Jackson is a Research Scientist, all in the Jackson School of Geosciences and Banner is Director of the Environmental Science Institute, University of Texas at Austin.

Hayhoe is a Research Associate Professor in the Department of Geosciences, Texas Tech University.

North is a Professor in the Department of Atmospheric Sciences, Texas A&M University.

Last Call For Stronger Emissions Targets. Pretty Please?

December 23rd, 2009 by vdavis No comments »

As we arrived in Copenhagen December 9, something called a “Copenhagen Accord” was only a glint in the eye of climate negotiators representing more than 190 countries at COP15. Considered disappointing and vague, this Accord is better than “a total collapse” of negotiations many feared on the last day of the two-week conference. Actually, COP15 spilled an extra day into Saturday, December 19, with a still-unprecedented outcome and 115 bleary-eyed heads of state heading home. The point of the Green Detectives blog is to demystify key elements central to climate talks, and the Copenhagen Accord is now one of them. So here you go.

The Copenhagen Accord is a three-page document that:

  • Gives a January 31, 2010, deadline to developed countries like the US to commit to 2020 emissions reduction targets. It gives the same deadline to developing countries to outline their “mitigation” actions. Mitigation basically refers to tactics, such as preventing deforestation, which reduce carbon emissions. President Obama has already committed the US to a 17% reduction by 2020. We heard many countries were strongly disappointed he didn’t bring something new to the table during his Friday morning Copenhagen speech. Could the US have more robust emissions targets if a Senate climate bill should pass before January 31? See blog below for Kevin’s outlook on 2010.
  • Establishes a Copenhagen Green Climate Fund of $30 billion for 2010-2020 for adaptation and mitigation funds to developing countries from developed countries, and $100 billion per year by 2020. You can brush up on Adaptation and Climate Finance by watching our Green Detectives Decoder Videos.
  • Acknowledges REDD and Technology Transfer as viable mitigation tactics. You can also watch our videos on these two topics.
  • Cites the need to prevent a 2C rise in global temperatures and calls for an assessment of the implementation of the Accord in 2015, when negotiators could consider strengthening the long-term goal of preventing a 1.5C rise in temperatures.
  • Does not call for a legally binding agreement in 2010. This fell off the table in the 11th hour of COP15 and was a huge disappointment to many, especially countries like Tuvalu that are most vulnerable to the effects of climate change.
  • Is “noted by” but not an official agreement of the COP.
  • Has been called a huge disappointment but does not mean more solid direction and traction will not be found by negotiators before the the end of the next COP meeting, slated for Mexico City in December 2010.
  • Is available for you to read for yourself on the UNFCCC Web site.