After Paris: Now What for World Climate? - Rawan For Media Artistic and Production
Experts
are under no illusion that celebrations and high-flown rhetoric are
enough when it comes to rolling back greenhouse-gas emissions.
If
anything, they say, the divisions that beleaguered the nearly two-week
haggle have underscored the political and economic obstacles that now
lie ahead.
The
deal finally struck on Saturday, a day into extra time, enshrines the
goal to cap global warming at two degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees
Fahrenheit) over pre-industrial levels -- and at an even more ambitious
1.5C if possible.
But
the bad news is that humanity may already have used up almost 1C of
that allocation, the UN's World Meteorological Organization warned last
month.
And
the emissions-curbing pledges submitted by 185 countries to give the
agreement substance, even if fully honoured, set the stage for a 3C
warmer world.
The
only hope lies in hard-fought provisions in the pact to encourage
nations to ramp up their actions over time, and thus keep a 2C goal in
focus.
"This
is the key thing to ensure that the actions get stronger and stronger
so that we get to two degrees and below," WWF climate expert Tasneem
Essop told AFP.
2C
is the threshold at which politicians hope mankind can avoid the worst
climate change impacts: dangerous storms, drought, sea-level rise, water
wars, mass migration and the spread of diseases.
The agreement itself admits "with concern" that current national plans are not enough.
As a result, it has built in a number of checks to try and keep the fast-closing 2C window ajar.
Scattered
over different sections of the 31-page document, the measures
collectively make up what has become known as a "ratcheting up"
mechanism.
It
could play a vital part in a pact where emissions commitments are
voluntary and there is no single timetable for achieving carbon
reductions, which scientists point to as a gaping flaw.
According
to the Climate Action Tracker (CAT), a tool developed by four climate
research institutes, most country pledges are "inadequate" and "nearly
all" governments need to enhance their 2025 or 2030 contributions.
The
first step will be a stock-taking in 2018, two years before the
agreement enters into force, of the overall impact of countries'
progress in abandoning fossil fuels like oil, coal and gas in favour of
renewable sources like solar and wind.
The
findings must inform the next round of country pledges to replace those
that will enter into force with the agreement, in 2020.
"This
will be a significant political moment where governments will be urged
to ramp up their efforts," said Mohamed Adow of Christian Aid, which
lobbies on poverty issues.
Observers
are concerned that unless the 2020 pledges are reviewed soon, the 3C
trajectory will be locked in for at least 10 years.
Some countries had set 10-year targets for 2025, others 15-year ones until 2030.
"It
just makes it harder and harder to take actions that can in fact bring
us down to the levels we need to be," said WWF climate analyst Tasneem
Essop.
Once the agreement takes effect, the collective impact of countries' efforts will be reviewed at five-year intervals from 2023.
The
outcome of these reviews will "inform" countries in "updating and
enhancing" their pledges every five years starting in 2025.
Many had hoped for more a more onerous obligation on countries to ramp up targets.
But
this was always going to be a tall order. There were objectors among
both developed and developing nation groups -- albeit for different
reasons.
- 'It has to be affordable' -
The
United States, for example, wants pledges to be purely voluntary to
avoid being obliged to take the accord to a hostile Congress for
ratification.
China,
India and other developing nations, in turn, wanted to make their
commitments conditional on assurances of finance to the tune of billions
of dollars in the coming decades to help them switch from cheap and
abundant fossil fuels to costly renewable sources like solar and wind.
Another
part of the problem was fear of failure -- negotiators were keen to
avoid a repeat of the 2009 UN climate conference in Copenhagen which
didn't even come close to sealing a global deal.
Instead
of a top-down approach of apportioning emissions targets, it opened the
way to a bottom-up approach: nations would set their own
emissions-cutting targets and timelines.
Indian
climate negotiator Ajay Mathur told AFP this week that the relatively
higher cost of green energy competed with the imperative of uplifting
millions of people from poverty in developing nations like his one.
"The key challenge, it has to be affordable," he said.
Felipe
Calderon, chairman of the Global Commission on the Economy and Climate,
a think tank, said the transition to a low-carbon economy was already
underway, and would be boosted by the agreement's dictate to peak fossil
fuel emissions "as soon as possible."
"From
now, on, the smart money will no longer go into fossil fuels, but into
cleaner energy, smarter cities, and more sustainable land use."
By AFP, 15 hours 22 minutes ago
After
a champagne moment in Paris, where ministers from around the world
crafted a pact to fight perilous climate change, comes the hard part.
a champagne moment in Paris, where ministers from around the world
crafted a pact to fight perilous climate change, comes the hard part.
Experts
are under no illusion that celebrations and high-flown rhetoric are
enough when it comes to rolling back greenhouse-gas emissions.
If
anything, they say, the divisions that beleaguered the nearly two-week
haggle have underscored the political and economic obstacles that now
lie ahead.
The
deal finally struck on Saturday, a day into extra time, enshrines the
goal to cap global warming at two degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees
Fahrenheit) over pre-industrial levels -- and at an even more ambitious
1.5C if possible.
But
the bad news is that humanity may already have used up almost 1C of
that allocation, the UN's World Meteorological Organization warned last
month.
And
the emissions-curbing pledges submitted by 185 countries to give the
agreement substance, even if fully honoured, set the stage for a 3C
warmer world.
The
only hope lies in hard-fought provisions in the pact to encourage
nations to ramp up their actions over time, and thus keep a 2C goal in
focus.
"This
is the key thing to ensure that the actions get stronger and stronger
so that we get to two degrees and below," WWF climate expert Tasneem
Essop told AFP.
2C
is the threshold at which politicians hope mankind can avoid the worst
climate change impacts: dangerous storms, drought, sea-level rise, water
wars, mass migration and the spread of diseases.
The agreement itself admits "with concern" that current national plans are not enough.
As a result, it has built in a number of checks to try and keep the fast-closing 2C window ajar.
Scattered
over different sections of the 31-page document, the measures
collectively make up what has become known as a "ratcheting up"
mechanism.
It
could play a vital part in a pact where emissions commitments are
voluntary and there is no single timetable for achieving carbon
reductions, which scientists point to as a gaping flaw.
According
to the Climate Action Tracker (CAT), a tool developed by four climate
research institutes, most country pledges are "inadequate" and "nearly
all" governments need to enhance their 2025 or 2030 contributions.
The
first step will be a stock-taking in 2018, two years before the
agreement enters into force, of the overall impact of countries'
progress in abandoning fossil fuels like oil, coal and gas in favour of
renewable sources like solar and wind.
The
findings must inform the next round of country pledges to replace those
that will enter into force with the agreement, in 2020.
"This
will be a significant political moment where governments will be urged
to ramp up their efforts," said Mohamed Adow of Christian Aid, which
lobbies on poverty issues.
Observers
are concerned that unless the 2020 pledges are reviewed soon, the 3C
trajectory will be locked in for at least 10 years.
Some countries had set 10-year targets for 2025, others 15-year ones until 2030.
"It
just makes it harder and harder to take actions that can in fact bring
us down to the levels we need to be," said WWF climate analyst Tasneem
Essop.
Once the agreement takes effect, the collective impact of countries' efforts will be reviewed at five-year intervals from 2023.
The
outcome of these reviews will "inform" countries in "updating and
enhancing" their pledges every five years starting in 2025.
Many had hoped for more a more onerous obligation on countries to ramp up targets.
But
this was always going to be a tall order. There were objectors among
both developed and developing nation groups -- albeit for different
reasons.
- 'It has to be affordable' -
The
United States, for example, wants pledges to be purely voluntary to
avoid being obliged to take the accord to a hostile Congress for
ratification.
China,
India and other developing nations, in turn, wanted to make their
commitments conditional on assurances of finance to the tune of billions
of dollars in the coming decades to help them switch from cheap and
abundant fossil fuels to costly renewable sources like solar and wind.
Another
part of the problem was fear of failure -- negotiators were keen to
avoid a repeat of the 2009 UN climate conference in Copenhagen which
didn't even come close to sealing a global deal.
Instead
of a top-down approach of apportioning emissions targets, it opened the
way to a bottom-up approach: nations would set their own
emissions-cutting targets and timelines.
Indian
climate negotiator Ajay Mathur told AFP this week that the relatively
higher cost of green energy competed with the imperative of uplifting
millions of people from poverty in developing nations like his one.
"The key challenge, it has to be affordable," he said.
Felipe
Calderon, chairman of the Global Commission on the Economy and Climate,
a think tank, said the transition to a low-carbon economy was already
underway, and would be boosted by the agreement's dictate to peak fossil
fuel emissions "as soon as possible."
"From
now, on, the smart money will no longer go into fossil fuels, but into
cleaner energy, smarter cities, and more sustainable land use."
By AFP, 15 hours 22 minutes ago
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق