World leaders are currently meeting in Copenhagen, Denmark to discuss a potential treaty or international agreement, similar to the Kyoto Protocol, which would help the global community work together to combat the effects of climate change and reduce greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs).As Andrew Forgrave reports for the Daily Post online (a publication from the United Kingdom), livestock production has become “central to negotiations . . . to secure a new global deal on climate change in Copenhagen.” Agriculture in general is expected to be effected by any agreement that is reached.
The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) “suggest global agriculture is responsible for 14% of global greenhouse gas emissions.” This estimate includes the impacts from the clearance of rainforest for agricultural uses.
Those defending current animal agricultural practices made the argument that the livestock industry can take on GHGs by changing breeding techniques and feeding techniques. The industry also believes research and development will help the livestock industry reduce its GHG impacts.
Meanwhile, Juliet Eilperin is reporting for the Washington Post that draft climate change initiatives are starting to come together. “In one of the most significant developments to date at the U.N.-sponsored climate talks, the ad-hoc group charged with charting a new path forward released a draft text Friday morning outlining the critical questions that need to be resolved before the talks end Dec. 18.”
The draft text was written by Michael Zammit Cutajar, who is serving as the chair of the Ad-hoc Working Group on Long-Term Cooperative Action. The draft is currently down from 180 pages of negotiations, to a new document just over six pages.
Eilperin reports that the document still leaves various options on the table for the key issues, but it also “establishes the parameters for what both industrialized and major developing countries would do to address climate change, and outlines how richer nations could finance climate actions by poorer ones.”
The document “stipulates” the world community should try to keep temperatures from rising by 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit beyond pre-industrial levels. Several other targets are offered for developed countries that would have them cutting GHGs by a certain percentage, yet to be determined, by 2020. Developing countries would also be required to cut their GHGs emissions over the same time period, though be a lesser percentage. “The draft also calls on rich nations to provide fast-start funding over the next three years for developing countries to cope with climate change, but doesn't specify an amount.”
Nations with individual concerns, such as island nations who stand to lose the most by rising sea levels, are offering their own vision for how the climate change treaty should look. Keya Chatterjee, the US director of the World Wildlife Fund climate change program believes that now that drafts are starting to come out negotiators need to press hard for the most ambitious agreement possible.
One criticism the current draft faces from activists is that the document does not lay out a plan for the long-term financing needed to help developing, poorer countries “cope” with climate change. ‘"The center piece of the deal being proposed today gives no guarantee that the deal in Copenhagen will deliver action,’ said Antonio Hill, Oxfam International's senior climate advisor. ‘With millions of people already suffering from flash floods and withering droughts, we need a new legal deal, not more deliberation and delay."’
Also being reported today, this time from James Kanter and Andrew C. Revkin of the New York Times, is the news that the European Union (EU) has announced it will contribute “about $3 billion starting next year to help poorer countries deal with climate change. The announcement was made today by Britain Prime Minister Gordon Brown. It is hoped that this move by the EU may “improve the chances of reaching an accord next week [.]”
The money would go to the fast-start fund, which will run until 2012. This means the total European contribution could be nearly $9 billion over this time. The Times reports that Yvo de Boer, the head of the UN climate office, has requested $30 billion for the fund to help developing countries begin necessary engineering projects needed to protect the nations against the adverse impacts of climate change.
“Poor countries also are seeking a commitment from the industrialized world to provide long-term finance totaling more than $100 billion each year by the end of the next decade, and have tried to pressure richer countries to do more to cut their own greenhouse gas emissions.”President Obama is expected to join the talks before they wrap up next week. One reason the administration had been in a bind about who to send to Copenhagen, and when, is the fact that without a bill from Congress it will be hard for the President to predict what the Senate would accept, which the Senate must do per their Advice and Consent powers under the US Constitution.
To this end, Senators John Kerry (MA), Lindsey Graham (SC), and Joe Lieberman (CN) announced a bipartisan domestic climate change bill that would combine GHG limits with additional offshore drilling, according to Houston Chronicle’s Jennifer A. Dlouhy. The bill would also allow for more nuclear power and would add protections for refiners. This is seen as a necessary compromise in order to get “support from wary lawmakers.”
Graham said the group ‘“did this just for Copenhagen … to give the president guidance on what he could say’ about progress in the Senate on the issue.”
As of yet the proposal doesn’t have legislative language but outlines the goals of the Senate bill.
“The trio of senators defended the brevity, noting that their proposal for the first time clearly laid out what would be in the compromise package they are developing.” The White House issued a prepared statement calling the Senate action a ‘“significant step in the effort to pass comprehensive energy reform.”’
Now the president has something he can point to in terms of potential senate action, but it remains to be seen what impact this new compromise, or the president’s arrival in Copenhagen, will have on any deal reached by the international community.
To read the Daily Post article click here.
To read the Washington Post article click here.
To read the New York Times article, click here.
To read the Houston Chronicle article, click here.
Posted: 12/11/09
