The NASA study showed that global temperatures have been rising at the relatively rapid rate of 0.36 degrees Fahrenheit per decade for the past 30 years. A separate temperature analysis by the U.S. National Climatic Data Center also concluded that the 2000's were the warmest decade since record-keeping began, although that study disagreed with the NASA study on whether 2009 was the second or the fifth warmest year on record.

There is no debate, however, that the 10 hottest years on record have all occurred since 1998, or that in the Southern Hemisphere 2009 was the warmest year since temperature measurements began.

Gavin Schmidt, a climatologist at Goddard, said the debate over which recent year was the hottest is irrelevant, and that the key data is the trend of the world warming by roughly 1 degree F every 30 years. Average global temperatures have risen by roughly 1.5 F since 1880.

NASA's data was collected from more than 1,000 meteorological stations worldwide, satellite observations of sea surface temperatures, and Antarctic research station records.

Reprinted with permission from Yale Environment 360

Scientists around the world have worked for a decade to solve one of the most apocalyptic aspects of climate change: that heat kills crops. This work is needed because, even just in the US, an 82% drop in corn and soy is predicted by the end of the century because there will be too many days over 86 degrees Fahrenheit in the Corn Belt, if we keep on adding greenhouse gases at the current rate.

Now, Philip Wigge and Vinod Kumar, two Norwich-based scientists at the John Innes Centre have just had the necessary breakthrough. They subjected grain plants to drought stresses that normally kill them, and isolated genes from survivors to create new variants, and just published their findings in the current edition of the US-based peer-reviewed scientific journal Cell.

They located the "thermometer" gene that helps plants sense temperature; even variations of just one degree Celsius, "and yet no one had asked how plants were able to do this"says Wigge.

They took the lab rat of plant research; the Arabidopsis (mustard) plant and studied all its genes to see which were affected by warmer temperature. It took five years for them to create a mutant plant that had lost its ability to sense temperature correctly. It grew as if the temperature was optimal all the time. The sensitive genes were then used in new plants.

It is possible that these scientists will be able to get it working just in time; within the next ten to fifteen years. In ten years, climate change impacts will be already widespread. Temperatures in the American West and Southwest could average nine degrees Fahrenheit hotter by the end of this century. Australia had to stop irrigating 40% of its crops in 2007.

The worldwide scientific consensus, as summarized in the papers at the last Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projected that food production in some regions could be severely compromised by 2020.

Whenever plants are subjected to extreme stress, such as very high or low temperatures, they do not flower and grow because they divert their food to their embryo.

"Their instinct is to protect the next generation," said Wigge.

Plants are better adapted to survive, than people are, in that respect. They might outlive us. But then they have had a million or so more years to learn that clever trick.

Reprinted with permission from Cleantechnica ]]> Green Agriculture Climate Change climate change global warming environment emissions green house gas carbon green agriculture green agriculture posts green agriculture entries Thu, 21 Jan 2010 08:05:00 -0800 http://www.matternetwork.com/2010/1/scientists-locate-thermometer-gene-creates.cfm Cleantechnica http://www.matternetwork.com/2010/1/animal-health-organization-study-meat.cfm PARIS (Reuters) - The World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) is to study the impact of meat output on climate change in the light of debate about meat's contribution to greenhouse emissions, the Paris-based body said on Thursday. The initiative, which will be the OIE's first on an environmental issue, follows requests from its member countries to look at a question that has prompted calls to eat less meat. Meat production is estimated to account for 18 percent of all greenhouse gas emissions, according to the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization, and some scientists have cited lower meat consumption as a way of tackling climate change. A campaign led by former Beatle Paul McCartney to get people not to eat meat one day a week has also drawn attention to the issue. But OIE Director-General Bernard Vallat warned against oversimplifying the issue, stressing factors such as the carbon-stocking role of pasture land would have to be evaluated. "It's a question that needs to be studied with a lot of distance," he told a news conference. "We want to make a modest and independent contribution." People also needed to be aware that livestock production generated milk and eggs as well as meat and so could not be sacrificed at a time of fast-growing protein demand among the world's population, he said. "There is not yet a scientific model that can prove that our planet could do without milk, eggs or meat." The study would thus likely recommend further research to find ways of limiting the direct effects of meat production on the environment, such as methane emissions, Vallat added. Another focus for the OIE this year would be reducing cases of rabies, which kills 50,000 people worldwide annually, mainly following dog bites. The body was notably calling for developing countries to devote more money to vaccinating dogs rather than just treating infected people which was much more expensive, Vallat said. (Reporting by Gus Trompiz; Editing by Keiron Henderson) Reprinted with permission from Reuters ]]> Climate Change climate change global warming environment emissions green house gas carbon Fri, 08 Jan 2010 07:20:00 -0800 http://www.matternetwork.com/2010/1/animal-health-organization-study-meat.cfm Reuters http://www.matternetwork.com/2010/1/communicating-climate-change-isolated-weather.cfm By Dave Levitan of Ecopolitology

The idealist in me really thought we would have gotten past this by now, but it seems that one of the biggest obstacles remaining in climate science messaging is the disconnect between weather and climate. Vocal deniers still trumpet about cold weather, and both sides of the issue correctly assert that individual weather events cannot be definitively attributed to global warming. A largely confused public could use some clarity on this.

Communicating the importance of climate change has always been difficult, given that it is a slow process (well, relative to human lives at least) that doesn't have any particularly tangible thing on which to hang the message. Sea level rise is not a visible process until Bangladesh is already under water, and Rhode Island-sized ice shelves only slide into the sea every so often. Journalists and advocates resort to pretty faces like polar bears and penguins, or the sharp contrast of a living coral reef with a bleached and dead one.

These images, though, clearly haven't been enough to dispel continuing disinformation about the contrast between what you see out your window and what the world will look like in 10 years, 50 years, 100 years. Hurricanes and droughts seem like good images to convince the public, but how many times have you seen something along the lines of: "An individual storm cannot be blamed on global warming"? So, when the mercury drops below freezing, it means global warming was a hoax, but when a hugely powerful hurricane drowns a city, suddenly everyone and their mother understands the science a bit better.

I know that the hurricane habit is a good one. Even though there is increasing evidence that warming is probably causing hurricanes to get stronger, and will almost certainly cause longer and worse droughts in various parts of the world, it is correct to stay away from "global warming caused Katrina" kinds of headlines. What bothers me about this is that is basically just taking advantage of a loophole to avoid an important point.

I'll dip into the sports analogy bag to explain. Mark McGwire hit 583 homeruns in his career, currently tied for the eighth most ever hit. But after his career was over it became (mostly) clear that he had, um, enhanced himself a bit (read: he injected lots of drugs into his ass). He gave one disastrous bit of testimony to Congress, and all of a sudden he is a pariah. His entire legacy is tainted, and last year he received only 22 percent of Hall of Fame votes (you need 75 percent to be elected). This is the man with the best home runs-per-at-bat rate in history (better than Babe Ruth), and only 22 percent of voters (all of whom are sports journalists, by the way) think he belongs in the sport's Hall of Fame.

But how many of those 583 home runs can be definitively linked to steroid use? Forget for a minute the fact that he never even really tested positive for anything (because testing hadn't been implemented yet). Even if we assume drug use, that doesn't tell us which of those hits would have landed 15 feet shorter, or if he would have been injured more often. But in this case, we the public take the opposite route from the climate change/weather version: we decide that they all were linked to steroid use.

Imagine if we, the climate science communicators, had somehow managed that coup in the public discourse. Yes, I know it's not true. But neither is the steroid/home run argument. I'm not advocating pretending an individual hurricane is the direct result of global warming, but I am advocating an increased focus on the bigger picture. Fine, an individual home run isn't tainted, but that 583 number looks hugely suspicious. Polar bears will only take you so far, and when cities drown and countries bake, journalists shouldn't be afraid to use those images to try and advance a scientific message.

This article originally appeared on Ecopolitology ]]> Climate Change climate change global warming climate change Wed, 06 Jan 2010 06:35:00 -0800 http://www.matternetwork.com/2010/1/communicating-climate-change-isolated-weather.cfm Ecopolitology http://www.matternetwork.com/2009/12/obama-reaches-climate-deal-emerging.cfm President Barack Obama reached agreement with major developing powers on a climate deal on Friday, a U.S. official said, but he said the accord was only a first step and was insufficient to fight climate change. The official said Obama, China's Premier Wen Jiabao, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and South Africa's President Jacob Zuma had reached a "meaningful agreement," after a day of deep divisions between leaders of rich and developing nations. Brazil also approved the deal that appeared to bypass other participants at UN-led climate talks in Copenhagen. The accord did not have guaranteed approval from all 193 nations. Noticeably, EU nations were absent from the meeting. Tensions between China and the United States, the world's two biggest emitters, had been particularly acute after Obama -- in a message directed at the Chinese -- said any deal to cut emissions would be "empty words on a page" unless it was transparent and accountable. Negotiators struggled all day to find a compromise acceptable to all 193 countries which could avert the threat of dangerous climate change, including floods, droughts, rising sea levels and species extinctions. A draft text under discussion on Friday included $100 billion in climate aid annually by 2020 for poor countries to combat climate change, and targets to limit warming and halve global greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. But it abandoned earlier ambitions for any deal in Copenhagen to be turned into a legally binding treaty next year. "Today, following a multilateral meeting between President Obama, Premier Wen, Prime Minister Singh, and President Zuma a meaningful agreement was reached," the U.S. official said. "It is not sufficient to combat the threat of climate change but it is an important first step." "No country is entirely satisfied with each element but this is a meaningful and historic step forward and a foundation from which to make further progress," the official added. Under the five-nation agreement, rich and poor nations had agreed to a "finance mechanism," emissions cuts to curb global warming to 2 degrees Celsius, and "to provide information on the implementation of their actions." Earlier, Indian environment minister Jairam Ramesh told Reuters December 7-18 meeting was "close to seeing a legally non-binding Copenhagen outcome after 36 hours of grueling, intensive negotiations." The European Union had pressed for a strong deal to limit global warming to no more than 2 degrees Celsius and which included tough carbon curbs from other industrialized nations such as the United States. Scientists say a 2 degrees limit is the minimum to avoid some of the worst impacts of climate change including several meters sea level rise, species extinctions and crop failures. "Given where we started and the expectations for this conference, anything less than a legally binding and agreed outcome falls far short of the mark," said John Ashe, chair the Kyoto talks under the United Nations. (With reporting by Alister Doyle, Gerard Wynn, Anna Ringstrom, John Acher, Anna Ringstrom, Richard Cowan, David Fogarty, Pete Harrison and Emma Graham-Harrison; Writing by Dominic Evans; editing by Janet McBride). Reprinted with permission from Reuters ]]> Climate Change climate change global warming climate change Sat, 19 Dec 2009 07:37:00 -0800 http://www.matternetwork.com/2009/12/obama-reaches-climate-deal-emerging.cfm Reuters http://www.matternetwork.com/2009/12/copenhagen-summary-signs-of-hope.cfm

Developed nations rounded up additional pledges for adaptation and mitigation funding in Copenhagen on Wednesday, and on Thursday developing nations won a procedural battle that has slowed negotiations over the past week and a half.

Japan stepped up with a large commitment to add about $19.5 billion to short-term funding for developing nations for the years 2010-2012, according to an AFP report. Along with previous commitments of $10.6 billion by the European Union, this is enough to fund the $10 billion a year proposed for this time period.

The U.S. has yet to commit to commit to specific funding amounts.

Thursday morning, Danish Prime Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen, who is presiding over the remainder of the conference, said he would abandon an attempt to combine various negotiating texts into a single document for review by heads of state in the final hours. (Reuters reporting)

Developing nations have repeatedly protested against the creation of such a text, arguing that it benefits industrialized nations and their desire to create a single unifying agreement to replace Kyoto Protocol.

Delegates agreed to split talks into two tracks--one looking at further commitments by developed nations except the United States to cut emissions until 2020 and another looking at ways to get all nations to slow climate change.

UN Climate Secretary Yvo De Boer on Wednesday asked the U.S. to make a specific proposal on climate financing to developing countries, according to the Xinhua News Agency. He noted that the US is in a difficult position, not having taken steps to slow emissions under the Kyoto Protocol. He also said he believes China's offer to reduce the intensity of its greenhouse gas emissions 40-45% by 2020 is "very encouraging."

US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton arrived on Thursdsay and said the US is willing to participate in a $100-billion-a-year fund through the year 2020, but that China must be willing to allow for verification of its emissions reduction efforts.

Although Clinton did not give a specific US contribution figure, the commitment was considered a breakthrough, leading de Boer to say: ""Hold tight. Mind the doors. The cable car is moving again."

Clinton said the money would be a mix of public and private funds, including "alternative sources of finance." Typically in multilateral financial efforts the United States contributes about 20% according to the New York Times.

Reuters on Wednesday quoted an unnamed Western negotiator who said China told participants it saw no possibility of achieving a detailed accord to tackle global warming. But on Thursday, China refuted the story as a rumor meant to lay blame on China, should negotiations fail.

China's climate change ambassador Yu Qingtai said "Copenhagen is too important to fail." He said the Chinese delegation "came to Copenhagen with hope and have not given it up." (Reuters reporting)

China has softened its stance against mandatory verification of its promised emissions reductions, according to a separate Reuters story. The country's head negotiator Su Wei said "national communications" on emissions as outlined by the Kyoto Protocol would be sufficient.

"It will not be difficult for us to find a solution to this problem (verification), as long as we adhere to the principles of the convention, it is not a crucial problem," he said.

Another hopeful sign that developing and developed nations may be moving closer on their demands is that Africa reportedly scaled back its expectations for climate aid on Wednesday, according to a report on MSNBC.com. The report did not state by how much, but African nations had previously asked for $40 billion a year in the mid-term.

The US on Wednesday pledged $1 billion to the reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation (REDD) program, bringing total funding for the period 2010-2012 to $3.5 billion.

The New York Times report did not give any details as to the current form of the program. Environmentalists earlier in the week said it had been stripped of important targets and safeguards.

Republican Senator and climate change denier James Inhofe (R-Okla.) made an unwelcomed press appearance Thursday morning, after failing to receive an invite to talk within the conference.

"I am here to make sure the 190 countries here don't go home with the false impression," he told a somewhat hostile crowd. "The United States is not going to pass cap and trade. It just isn't going to happen. Its chances are zero."

Fox News reported that "Inhofe often looked like a lamb on his way to slaughter."

Obama arrives in Copenhagen Friday morning. Obama is unlikely to propose a more aggressive emissions reduction target, according to Reuters.

However, he may have wiggle room to raise his pledge from 17% below 2005 levels to 20%--the level proposed in a current US Senate bill.

Combined with specific, big numbers to support Clinton's $100 billion proposal, Obama could prompt agreement to a specific, but non-binding framework on Friday. However, that would likely require other developed nations to push to higher levels for emissions reductions--a brave step in light of US history on Kyoto and the Obama Administration's inability to guarantee cooperation of the US Congress. ]]> Climate Change Emissions smart grid smart grid posts smart grid entries smart grid climate change global warming climate change emissions carbon capture co pollution Fri, 18 Dec 2009 07:23:00 -0800 http://www.matternetwork.com/2009/12/copenhagen-summary-signs-of-hope.cfm SustainableBusiness http://www.matternetwork.com/2009/12/clinton-copenhagen-100-billion-tends.cfm By Dave Levitan

With only a couple of days left in the COP15 climate summit in Copenhagen, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton showed up with a pretty solid secret weapon: $100 billion per year by 2020 promised (maybe) to poor and at-risk countries to aid with adaptation to rising sea levels, increased drought and other severe effects of climate change. It came at just the right time.

The past few days had seen the protests in Copenhagen ratchet up and the chances of a major deal of any sort being reached ratchet down. On Monday, delegates of 130 poorer nations walked out of the conference in protest to what seemed like a lack of commitment on the part of the rich, developed nations. Even the New York Times editorial page seemed shaken to the point of confusion, with a on again-off again editorial on the benefits of preventing deforestation and the looming disaster of a failed climate summit.

Enter Hillary and her suitcase full of money. She stressed that the money, which will come from a mix of public and private sources, is only going to be available if India and China stop stalling and agree to real emissions targets very soon. "Without that accord, there won't be the kind of joint global action from all of the major economies we all want to see, and the effects in the developing world could be catastrophic," Clinton said at a press conference in Copenhagen.

No one seems to think that COP15 will result in a binding agreement, but a framework on which to set up that agreement by next year is a realistic goal. Well, at least now it is. Suddenly, after days of looking like the bad guy, China reiterated a willingness to establish an agreement, with the country's Climate Change Ambassador Yu Qingtai telling Reuters "I can assure you that the Chinese delegation came to Copenhagen with hope and have not given it up. Copenhagen is too important to fail."

The news isn't all good, of course - the $100 billion is actually less than a goal set by the European Union, and of course the poor countries themselves wouldn't mind having a few more dollars to fight off complete catastrophe. But it's a start, and it seems to have kickstarted these last few unbelievably important days of COP15.

Read the original article at Ecopolitology

By Joe Walsh

In this space last week, I wrote a column that I thought might draw the ire of some greens for its cynical outlook on Copenhagen. Instead, it drew a fair amount of attention from readers concerned that I had glossed over the significance of "Climategate." Like that column, this one is not about Climategate in the broader sense, but about its impact on the goings-on this week in Denmark. And, as we look back at week one of COP-15, last week's column looks to have been borne out in that context. Join me for this more complete review of the political freeze that has taken over the warming talks.

Climategate is Good as Gone...For Now - As expected, Climategate disappeared as fast as it rose to the top of Google's search rankings. Worldwide, media reports are focusing on the very compelling, very well-packaged stories about climate change impact and emerging technologies that were in the can as this conference approached. The email controversy may well reemerge at the conclusion of the conference; and, as I noted in comments responding to reader comments to last week's piece, Climategate may ultimately be seen as the sort of watershed moment that was needed to reignite some passion in this debate. But, at least in the world-within-the-world at Copenhagen this week, Climategate-stoked doubt about climate change is not the issue.

US Fizzles- After months of pressure and rhetoric in US politics, marked by doomsday scenarios that would befall the world should the US not have a climate change bill on the President's desk before Copenhagen, the US delegation arrived with the following: an EPA declaration that was inevitable and had been dramatically undersold in favor of pushing for legislation; and, a December 10 announcement by a tri-partisan (including an independent) group of Senators, which purported to "outline the basics" for a domestic climate bill that might come to the floor in the spring. In a week when the President of the United States delivered what has to be the most impassioned defense of war in the history of Nobel Peace Prize acceptances, his delegation at the climate conference tried to claim leadership in a very tricky geopolitical negotiation after having failed to clear the relatively less complex partisan, political and special interest hurdles at home.

China Sizzles, But Where's the Steak? China is the Donald Trump of climate change action. Big promises, high-dollar investments. Big, big, big! 800 turbines in three gorges? Bring it on! Planting enough new trees to cover all of Norway? Why not! Just don't ask them to cut emissions. First, it is not practical to do so, their growth makes it impossible. Second, they don't have the money to pay for it (probably because it is all on loan to the US, but that is another column for another blog). And, the reports coming from state-controlled media do not offer much comfort. Long term, China looks like a promising green partner for the world. They are going to continue to develop clean energy technologies domestically and will continue to flood the global market with low-cost, Chinese-fabricated panels, blades and batteries.

Right now, the Chinese would be foolish to have fabricators sell those products to domestic buyers and capture the revenue in yuan when they could be sold overseas for more valuable dollars, Euros and pounds. Will they ever reach a tipping point where some of those items will stay in country instead of being produced exclusively for export? That tipping point appears to be approaching for jeans, TVs and other Chinese-made goods, but clean energy technology? Don't hold your breath.

For signs of success in week two, watch the tail numbers of planes at Copenhagen Airport - It will be interesting to see who actually shows up in Copenhagen next week. We know President Obama is en route, but will the Russians, Chinese or Indians keep their dates to have heads of state make the trip to town? Probably. Will it move the needle? I doubt it.

In the end, the problem with Copenhagen cannot be solved by next week, no matter who is at the table. That problem can best be discerned in the verb tense most-often used in speeches, discussions and negotiations there: the future. For thirty-five years, the public (including skeptics) have been hearing about what WILL happen to the planet and about the technologies that WILL emerge to make clean energy affordable. The urgency has not come yet. The world is not ready. Let us hope that by the time we are, it is not too late.

Reprinted with permission from Red Green and Blue ]]> Carbon Emissions Climate Change climate change global warming environment emissions green house gas carbon carbon emissions carbonemissions posts carbonemissions entries carbonemissions business technology Mon, 14 Dec 2009 05:26:00 -0800 http://www.matternetwork.com/2009/12/copenhagen-week-one-climategate-china.cfm Red Green and Blue http://www.matternetwork.com/2009/12/soros-says-he-has-way.cfm COPENHAGEN (Reuters) - Billionaire financier George Soros told Reuters on Thursday he had found a way to unlock a stalemate on climate finance using International Monetary Fund assets. Soros wants to invest $1 billion of a total of his own $25 billion funds in low-carbon assets. U.N. talks in Copenhagen, meant to agree the outline of a new climate treaty to succeed the Kyoto Protocol, are stuck on splitting the bill to cut carbon emissions and prepare for more droughts, floods and rising seas. Poorer nations want rich countries to spend 1 percent or more of their national wealth on emissions cuts in the developing world, or at least $300 billion annually, about double the closest estimates by industrialized countries. "I've found a way for someone else to pay ... to mobilize reserves that are lying idle," said Soros, on the sidelines of the December 7-18 conference which world leaders will attend in the closing two days. "The whole conference might break down because of this, and this $100 billion fund I think could just turn this conference from failure to success." Developed countries could invest a portion of $283 billion IMF special drawing rights (SDRs) in carbon-cutting projects in developing nations, he said. The IMF made the rights available to help combat the recession, by unlocking financial liquidity after panic froze debt markets -- including more than $150 billion for the 15 biggest developed economies, Soros said. The low-carbon projects themselves would pay the interest on the proposed $100 billion to be spent over the next decade, from earnings which would depend on a carbon price for example under a global market in offsets and other carbon emissions permits. IMF gold reserves would guarantee the principle and interest. Soros acknowledged a series of obstacles to his proposal, including U.S. Congress approval, IMF director approval and a global carbon price. "The IMF directors are not keen to use it (gold reserve). If you on the board of directors you like to have this nice substantial reserve to sit on so they won't actually do this of their own free will," he said, adding political will was needed to drive his initiative. Other ideas on the table to unlock climate finance include a levy on transport fuels in shipping and aviation, a tax on rich nation carbon emissions rights or a fund raised from countries according to their contribution to climate change and ability to pay. (Reporting by Gerard Wynn, Editing by Janet Lawrence) Reprinted with permission from Reuters ]]> Environment Climate Change environment global warming air pollution climate change causes global warming greenhouse effect carbon dioxide global climate change carbon footprint carbon capture water purification process carbon sequestration algae carbon sequestration food vs fuel Thu, 10 Dec 2009 08:43:00 -0800 http://www.matternetwork.com/2009/12/soros-says-he-has-way.cfm Reuters http://www.matternetwork.com/2009/12/copenhagen-summary-day-1.cfm

The largest climate meeting in history kicked off in Copenhagen, Denmark yesterday drawing 15,000 participants from 192 countries.

The meeting will conclude next week with a Summit of 105 world leaders, marking the significance and high expectations for this event, which aims to produce a global agreement on combating the build-up of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. It's worth noting that the Kyoto meeting, which resulted in the current protocol, was attended only by environmental ministers.

Six-Month Deadline

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown wrote in the Guardian that the goal of Copenhagen is to secure a "comprehensive and global agreement" to be converted into a legally binding treaty in "no more than six months."

"If by the end of next week we have not got an ambitious agreement, it will be an indictment of our generation that our children will not forgive," he wrote.

China, Brazil, South Africa and India also called for a legally binding treaty to be complete by mid-2010.

Reuters obtained a draft document jointly prepared by the countries, in which they state the negotiating group should complete its work by 2010. Other countries have suggested December 2010 as a deadline, an issue that could present a sticking point.

The document also states that rich nations must not create border tariffs that would undermine the economic advantages for emerging nations under a global treaty. Lawmakers in the U.S. and other developed nations have discussed creating such tariffs to limit the impact on domestic businesses from competition in countries without tough carbon limits.

Funding for Emerging Countries

The draft document also calls for the creation of a global climate fund to help developing countries prepare for and mitigate against climate change, to be administered by the Global Environment Facility.

UN Climate Secretary De Boer wants developed nations to immediately fund $10 billion a year for this purpose--though estimates for funding needed in later years is much higher.

The US proposed that such a fund should be managed by the World Bank, according to a New York Times report. This proposal is likely to draw opposition from activists who believe the World Bank favors fossil fuel development and rich nations.

The NY Times report suggests the US may commit to initial funding of $1.3 billion.

Bangladesh environment minister Hasan Mahmud Khondoker told a news conference today, that his country is entitled to ask for at least 15% of any climate adaptation fund, because it is the most vulnerable to climate change.

"The population of our one coastal district is bigger than the entire population of all island countries and in that consideration at least 15% of any climate fund should come to us," he said. (Reuters coverage)

The President of the Africa Development Bank (AfDB) said rich nations should commit $40 billion a year to help Afica adjust to global warming. "Climate change is costing this continent almost 3 percent of GDP (gross domestic product) per year. Now translate that into numbers, the kind of things we need: about $40 billion a year," he told Reuters in an interview.

South Africa Steps Up

South Africa offered a birght spot in the news cycle. The country said it will reduce its carbon emissions 34% by 2020, from estimated business-as-usual levels for that year.

"This undertaking is conditional on firstly a fair, ambitious and effective agreement," a South African government statement said. "And secondly, the provision of support from the international community, and in particular finance, technology and support."

Read the full BBC story at the link below.

Website: news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8398775.stm

Reprinted with permission from

During the run up to the Copenhagen climate change conference the blogosphere had been brimming with pro-climate deal news with several countries announcing carbon reduction measures and record size green energy power projects being announced almost every week. The climate change skeptics had taken a backseat, so to say. But after the climategate incident the argument between the skeptics and believers got ignited once again. The stakes are high this time as representatives from about 190 countries meet in Copenhagen to discuss new climate treaty.

But one does not need to believe in climate change to support the potential climate deal which is scheduled to replace the Kyoto Protocol after 2012. The climate deal means much more than just carbon cuts, carbon trading and adaptation fund. A scientifically sound climate deal would bring many other positive changes for the environment, economy and the society.

Sustainable Development

No one can challenge the concept of sustainable development, the world needs no scientists or intergovernmental panel to tell you that sustainable development is the most efficient way for an economy, a country, a country or a household to work and grow.

What the proposed climate deal would do is that it would lay down certain minimum standards of emission outputs which various countries would be legally bound to achieve. These standards, as we have seen, would be connected with each country's own predictions and projections about their future economic growth rates. Sustainable economic growth would not only help the environment but would also result in better and more efficient use of resources, which includes both energy and non-energy resources, so that they are available for the future generations.

Forest Conservation

Forest conservation is among the central issues at Copenhagen. We can expect a formal agreement on the Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation since there is widespread consensus on the issue. Although the REDD credit scheme is quite complicated its underlining goal and principle is to make forest conservation a profitable exercise thereby reducing deforestation.

Implementation of this scheme would open up forest conservation as a revenue source for many developing and poor countries in South America and Africa. Indonesia and Brazil have already tightened rules on forest logging while many African nations are receiving aid from European countries for forest conservation. The deal would no doubt increase forest cover in many countries.

Cleaner Air

New, and hopefully, tougher emission cuts would force the existing fossil fuel based power plants to work more efficiently and thus levels of polluting agents would decrease. Once the deal is in place countries would have to upgrade their air quality standards. United States' EPA made significant changes to the air standards followed under the Bush Administration and is planning to declare carbon dioxide a 'public danger'. Last month India upgraded its air quality standards for the first time in 15 years and indicated that its air quality standards would soon match those followed in the European Union.

Inclusive Growth

Better resource utilization would also help the poor and needy get access to the relatively cheap resources since the renewable energy sources will continue to be costlier than conventional fuels. The poor cannot wait for the scientists to achieve cost parity between electricity generated from solar, wind and coal, natural gas.

The World Bank, in a report earlier in the year, justified India's tough stand against mandatory emission targets as it intends to invest heavily in rural electrification, broadly based on coal fired power plants, over the next few decades. With India's goal of reducing carbon intensity by 24 percent by 2020 it becomes important that the existing power plants become more efficient thereby giving the new power plants meant for rural electrification some leeway as far as cost of production is concerned.

Energy Independence

The race for new energy resources could very well lead to direct confrontation between countries. We have seen the sudden increase in the attempts of Arctic countries to lay claims to the vast undiscovered energy reserves of Greenland. There are possibilities of international confrontations for sharing of water resources as some areas of the world experience prolonged droughts.

The climate deal would boost investment in renewable energy infrastructure which is vital for achieving energy independence. The Europeans have learned the importance of energy independence after Russia's arm-twisting tactic brought Europe's gas supplies to a standstill. In order to insulate the economy from the rising fuel prices and not to become victim of an international power showdown each country must endeavor to achieve complete or partial energy independence.

These concepts are extremely important for building an equal society with equal opportunities for all, for maintaining a healthy economic growth rate and safeguarding national interests. We must remember that carbon cuts are merely a part of the climate deal. Reducing our carbon outputs would bring many other positive results with it which are beneficial to the environment and the society as a whole.

Image Credit: Conor Dupre-Neary via flickr (Creative Commons license)

The views presented in the above article are author's personal views and do not represent those of TERI/TERI University where the author is currently pursuing a Master's degree.

Reprinted with permission from Cleantechnica ]]> Carbon Emissions Climate Change climate change global warming climate change carbon emissions carbon trading carbon caps Mon, 07 Dec 2009 05:50:00 -0800 http://www.matternetwork.com/2009/12/move-over-climategate-heres-why.cfm Cleantechnica http://www.matternetwork.com/2009/12/report-ozone-hole-has-shielded.cfm By Roger Greenway

An important report from the British Antarctic Survey (BAS) shows things aren't always what they seem to be, and that our knowledge of our complex Earth is not a good as we thought. Sometimes problems are not what they seem to be, and sometimes a problem in one sense carries unknown benefits in other senses.

The BAS is a global leader in studying the Antarctic, and it has recently published the first comprehensive review of the state of Antarctica's climate and its relationship to the global climatesystem. The review - Antarctic Climate Change and the Environment - presents the latest research from the icy continent, identifies areas for future scientific research, and addresses the urgent questions that policy makers have about Antarctic melting, sea-level rise and biodiversity.

Based on the latest evidence* from 100 world-leading scientists from 13 countries, the review focuses on the impact and consequences of rapid warming of the Antarctic Peninsula and the Southern Ocean; rapid ice loss in parts of Antarctica and the increase in sea ice around the continent; the impact of climate change on Antarctica's plants and animals; the unprecedented increase in carbon dioxide levels; the connections between human-induced global change and natural variability; and the extraordinary finding that the ozone hole has shielded most of Antarctica from global warming.

Professor John Turner of British Antarctic Survey is the lead editor of the review. He said, "For me the most astonishing evidence is the way that one man-made environmental impact - the ozone hole - has shielded most of Antarctica from another - global warming. Understanding the complexities surrounding these issues is a challenge for scientists - and communicating these in a meaningful way to society and to policymakers is essential. There is no doubt that our world is changing and human activity is accelerating global change.

This review is a major step forward in making sure that the latest and best evidence is available in one place. It sets the scene for future Antarctic Research and provides the knowledge that we all need to help us live with environmental change."

Key Findings of the report include:

1. Hole in ozone layer has shielded most of Antarctica from global warming

The ozone hole has delayed the impact of greenhouse gas increases on the climate of the continent. Consequently south polar winds (the polar vortex), have intensified and affected Antarctic weather patterns. Westerly winds over the Southern Ocean that surrounds Antarctica have increased by around 15%.

The stronger winds have effectively isolated Antarctica from the warming elsewhere on the planet. As a result during the past 30 years there has been little change in surface temperature over much of the vast Antarctic continent, although West Antarctica has warmed slightly. An important exception is the eastern coast of the Antarctic Peninsula, which has seen rapid summer warming. This warming is caused by stronger westerly winds bringing warm, wet air into the region from the ocean.

2. Warming of the Southern Ocean will cause changes in Antarctic ecosystem

The largest ocean current on Earth (the Antarctic Circumpolar Current) has warmed faster than the global ocean as a whole. The Southern Ocean is one of the major sinks of atmospheric CO2, but increasing westerly winds have affected the ocean's ability to absorb CO2 by causing the upwelling of CO2 rich water.

3. Rapid increase in plant communities across Antarctic Peninsula

Rapid warming has been seen along the western Antarctic Peninsula, along with a switch from snowfall to rain during summer, resulting in expansion of plant, animal and microbial communities in newly available land. Humans have also inadvertently introduced "alien" organisms such as grasses, flies and bacteria.

4. Rapid ice loss in parts of the Antarctic The West Antarctic Ice Sheet has significantly thinned particularly around the Amundsen Sea Embayment as a result of warmer ocean temperatures. Regional warming caused by intensification of the westerly winds (due to the ozone hole) is melting ice shelves along the eastern Antarctic Peninsula (e.g. Larsen B Ice Shelf).

5. 10% increase in sea ice around the Antarctic Since 1980 there has been a 10% increase in Antarctic sea ice extent, particularly in the Ross Sea region, as a result of the stronger winds around the continent (due to the ozone hole). In contrast, regional sea ice has decreased west of the Antarctic Peninsula due to changes in local atmospheric circulation and this has also been linked with the very rapid warming seen over land on the west coast of the Peninsula.

6. Carbon dioxide levels increasing at fastest pace in 800,000 years

Atmospheric concentrations of CO2 and CH4 are at higher levels than experienced in the last 800,000 years and are increasing at rates unlikely to have been seen in the (geologically) recent past. Antarctica was warmer in the last interglacial (130,000 years ago) and sea levels were higher, but the contribution of West Antarctica to that rise is currently unknown.

7. Sea ice loss directly affecting krill levels and penguin colonisation

Loss of sea ice west of the Antarctic Peninsula has caused changes in algal growth. This loss of sea ice has also caused a shift from large to smaller species. Stocks of krill have declined significantly. In some areas Adélie penguin populations have declined due to reduced sea ice and prey species (on the northern Antarctic Peninsula), but they have remained stable or increased elsewhere (Ross Sea and East Antarctica).

8. Antarctica predicted to warm by around 3 degrees Celsius over this century

Over this century the ozone hole is expected to heal, allowing the full effects of greenhouse gas increases to be felt across the Antarctic. Models suggest that the net effect will be continued slow strengthening of winds across the Southern Ocean, while sea ice will decrease by a third, resulting in increased phytoplankton productivity. The predicted warming of about 3C across the continent is not enough to melt the main ice sheet and an increase in snowfall there should offset sea level rise by a few centimetres.

9. West Antarctic ice loss could contribute to 1.4 m sea level rise

Loss of ice from the West Antarctic ice sheet is likely to contribute some tens of centimetres to global sea level by 2100. This will contribute to a projected total sea level rise of up to 1.4 metres (and possibly higher) by 2100. 10. Improved modeling of polar processes required for accurate predictions

Climate variability in the Polar Regions is larger than in other parts of the world, yet these remote regions are sparsely sampled. These areas need to be monitored in much greater detail in order to detect change, to improve understanding of the processes at work, and to distinguish between natural climate variability and variability caused by human influences.

Reprinted with permission from EnvironmentalNewsNetwork ]]> Climate Change climate change global warming environment emissions green house gas carbon Tue, 01 Dec 2009 06:31:00 -0800 http://www.matternetwork.com/2009/12/report-ozone-hole-has-shielded.cfm Environmental News Network