Environment Forum

from UK News:

Are you losing faith in climate science?

While attending a meeting of prominent climate sceptics during the U.N. Climate Conference in Copenhagen in December (an anti-COP15, if you will), I listened to each of the speakers put forward their theory on why conventional evidence on the primary causes of climate change should be dismissed as, for lack of a better phrase, complete hokum.

Among their denunciations of widely-accepted truths regarding global warming, greenhouse gases, melting glaciers and rising sea levels was the assertion that a change in attitude was afoot; the public may have been duped into believing the mainstream scientific assessment of climate change, but not for long.

There was something in the air, the sceptics said, and soon people would begin to question their trust in the majority view.

I’m no scientist and am in no position to comment on the validity of any of the evidence on show; as journalists we were there to make sure both sides of the argument were being heard. This group of climate outcasts were in every sense on the fringes of COP15, but after a series of controversies in recent weeks it seems they were right about one thing at least -- the public conviction about the threat of climate change is slipping.

Well, it is in Britain anyway. An Ipsos Mori poll of over 1,000 UK adults found that the proportion of people who believe climate change is definitely a reality dropped from 44% to 31% in the past year.

Meanwhile, 31% said the threat was exaggerated, up 50% on last year – worrying statistics for the government and charities trying to convince the public to change its behaviour and to accept higher priced energy and goods as a small price to pay for saving the planet.

Why the sudden drop off? The poll follows weeks of suggestions that mainstream climatologists have, in the past, manipulated data and that an influential study by the U.N.’s main climate science body contains inaccurate information.

from UK News:

Climate scientists seek to calm storm of doubt

If the scientific evidence for manmade global warming is so compelling, why do so many people still have their doubts?

Why do politicians and the media often discuss global warming with such certainty, ignoring the scientists' carefully worded caveats?

And how much harder will it be to persuade the sceptics after the uproar over whether scientists exaggerated unreliable evidence or colluded to withhold information to strengthen their case?

Those tricky questions were raised at a sometimes fractious news conference in London to discuss the future of climate science.

Three leading British scientists told reporters the science behind anthropogenic global warming was "overwhelming", but admitted they are struggling to get their message across to a sometimes doubtful public.

"We have a very confused public out there about climate change and science," said Julia Slingo, chief scientist at the Met Office. "We've got a real issue about communicating science in a very clear way that different levels of the public can understand. "

The problem, the panel suggested, lies not in the raw data but in how the information becomes garbled between the researchers and the public.

from Global News Journal:

“Earth to Ban Ki-moon” or how a deal was sealed in Copenhagen

Sweden complained that the recent Copenhagen climate change summit was a "disaster." British Prime Minister Gordon Brown described it as "at best flawed and at worst chaotic." Sudan's U.N. ambassador, Abdalmahmoud Abdalhaleem, dubbed the outcome confirmation of a "climate apartheid." For South Africa it was simply "not acceptable."

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, who for over a year had been urging the 192 members of the United Nations to "seal the deal" in Copenhagen, saw things differently. In a statement issued by his press office, Ban said the two-week meeting had a "successful conclusion with substantive outcomes." Speaking to reporters, the secretary-general expanded on that: "Finally we sealed the deal. And it is a real deal. Bringing world leaders to the table paid off." However, he tempered his praise for the participating delegations by noting that the outcome "may not be everything that everyone hoped for."

In fact, the outcome fell far short of what Ban had been calling for over the last year. He had originally hoped the meeting would produce a legally binding agreement with ambitious targets for reducing carbon dioxide emissions and funding to help developing nations cope with global warming. Instead it "noted" an accord struck by the United States, China and other emerging powers that was widely criticized as unambitious and unspecific.

That accord set a target of limiting global warming to a maximum 2 degrees Celsius over pre-industrial times -- seen as a threshold for dangerous changes such as more floods, droughts and rising seas. But it did not say how this would be achieved. It also held out the prospect of $100 billion in annual aid from 2020 for developing nations, but did not say where the money would come from. Decisions on fundamental issues such as emissions cuts were pushed into the future.

The South Korean U.N. chief was not the only person to praise the summit. U.S. President Barack Obama said the outcome was an "important breakthrough", but noted that it was only one step on the road towards the emissions cuts needed. The head of China's delegation, Xie Zhenhua, said the meeting "had a positive result, everyone should be happy." (Gordon Brown was clearly placing the blame for the underwhelming outcome in Copenhagen on China and a few other states when he said: "Never again should we let a global deal to move towards a greener future be held to ransom by only a handful of countries.")

Back in New York, some delegations were shaking their heads over Ban's bullish remarks about Copenhagen. "He is talking from Mars," said the Sudanese envoy, who currently chairs the Group of 77 club of developing nations at the U.N. But Ban is not in outer space, several U.N. officials insisted on condition of anonymity. Ban did not see the summit as a failure, but he, too, felt disappointed and would keep on working to "seal the deal" in 2010.

In fact, the U.N. officials said, Ban's personal intervention had helped prevent the summit from falling apart. "He's acutely aware of how much worse it could have been," one official said. He was making phone calls, organizing bilateral meetings and persuading reluctant delegates to join the consensus. "His final intervention at the 11th hour" helped secure that consensus, the official said.

Packing while Copenhagen burns

The talks were supposed to be over, “family photo” taken, and slaps on the back given all round.

So all the 193 countries and many RINGOS, BINGOS, YOUNGOS, banks and others who had set up temporary Copenhagen offices had been told to have them packed up by Friday evening.

The rest of the plan has fallen apart, with world leaders crammed into conference rooms desperately trying to salvage something from two weeks of fruitless talks.

But the packing at least is still going according to schedule, with everything from suitcases to floorboards being rolled out as anxious journalists and harried delegates look on.

At such a critical point in the negotiations, you would expect the Bella Center to be overflowing. Non-governmental organizations were all but banished earlier in the week just as the high-level talks were about to start, and now the office-space for delegates resembles a ghost town.

If the meetings go on past Friday, as the United Nations has apparently suggested to some delegates, the already gloomy negotiating teams may be meeting in stripped down rooms that will hardly add to their cheer.

from Global News Journal:

Parallel worlds at U.N. climate talks

While UN climate talks involving world leaders descended into chaos and farce in the rooms and corridors of this immediately forgettable Copenhagen exhibition centre, a parallel world flourished in its main conference hall.

Meetings of world leaders and environment ministers through Thursday night and Friday yielded a series of draft climate texts, each more toothless and lacking in ambition than the last. NGOs despaired. The assembled media veered between disbelief and boredom. And outside in the snow the vegans, climate activists and other protest groups kept up a steady drumbeat of protest in the snow.

But inside the main conference hall, bureaucrats continued the deliberations they started two years ago to negotiate a successor to the Kyoto Protocol. Unfazed by the chaos around them they worked their way laboriously and methodically through articles, sub-sections and clauses. All beamed live in to the press room but incomprehensible to the media.

At times of crisis people cling to certainty. Human nature is predictable. Will they still be running through the protocols when the first Pacific island sinks?

from Mario Di Simine:

At COP15, the waiting is now the hardest part

You go for walks, maybe stretch out on an open couch, perhaps stand in long lines for a luke-warm bite to eat. You make numerous trips to the vending machines, munch on biscuits, chat with colleagues. Life in the fast lane of the COP15 Climate Conference in Copenhagen has slowed down to a crawl, and the waiting is most certainly the hardest part.

On the final day of the conference, the media -- and everyone else -- is looking forward to an outcome, any outcome of a two-week marathon that was supposed to lead to cuts in greenhouse gas emisions and a 2010 deadline for a legally binding treaty.

The world leaders gathered here and their negotiators are still working on the cuts, but that deadline is now out in the cold. What kind of deal will finally emerge? No one here, not the media at least, has an answer to that yet.

In the meantime, we work the phones, we watch twitter chatter, we hope for word and the prospect of finally putting this behind us.

In the Bella Center, site of the two-week session, a quieter tone has set in.

It's quite the contrast to the earlier days when NGOs and environmental activists made their presence known with staged protests, costume stunts and undoubtedly the most popular event during the proceedings: the awarding of the Fossil of the Day, given to the country that did the least to help along the talks (or the most to hamper them). The grand winner was Canada, but we all knew that was coming after a near unbroken string of "victories" during the two weeks.

Elections shape Brazil delegation at Copenhagen

By Ray Colitt

Copenhagen summit attendees may be wondering why Brazil’s delegation to the U.N. climate meeting is being led not by its environment minister but by the president’s chief of staff. The answer is: elections next year in Brazil.

Chief of Staff Dilma Rousseff is the government’s likely candidate in next October’s general election and wants to boost her environmental credentials. She was nudged into action after internationally-renowned Amazon defender Marina Silva joined the presidential race and pledged to put the environment on the campaign agenda.

Ironically, it was Environment Minister Carlos Minc who saw the chance for Brazil to take a leadership position in global climate talks and Rousseff who was one of the more reticent members of government to accept aggressive emissions targets.

Still, in Copenhagen Rousseff has made sure everyone knows she is in charge by publicly correcting Minc’s statement on Brazil’s demand for climate mitigation funds.

 “The isolation of Environment Minister Carlos Minc is raising eyebrows here in Copenhagen,” said Senator Marina Silva, Minc’s predecessor.

The strange spectacle of too many heads of government

There are around 120 heads of government at the Copenhagen climate talks, so many that it’s hard to keep track of the exact number.

Their presence has been trumpeted as a sign of the world’s commitment to tackling climate change. But in return for showing up, they all want a chance to address the conference – and by extension the world.

To fit all the dignitaries in, organizers have slots limited to five short minutes, which would probably be barely enough to cover their introduction back home.

Even so, the presentations are scheduled to go on long past midnight, and have already been running very late – because of course no one can interrupt or turn off the microphone of a head of state. Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez managed to hold out for 25 minutes.

Meanwhile talks on agreeing the text of a deal have only just got down to work.

So the two live feeds into our media centre televisions, from the conference centre, are now offering up a strange spectacle.

On one screen there is a steady stream of heads of state, decked out in formal attire from every corner of the world, warning of floods, typhoons, desertification and drought, the urgency of the threat to our world and the need to protect our children.

Auxiliary verbs at 10pm and the scarcest resource – sleep

The issues are global and urgent, but the bureaucracy can sometimes be mind-bogglingly slow and petty.

After a day of stalled talks, the 193 nations at UN-led climate talks finally met for a plenary to discuss one of the main drafts floating around the summit, just two days (and two hours) from the deadline for a deal.

First on the agenda – auxiliary verbs. There was a discussion of should vs shall, before an appeal from the chair.

“I would ask you to consider the most scarce resource in this room – sleep”

Her request was applauded, but the talks anyway soon plunged into a discussion of clauses and sub-clauses.

An Indian delegate directed others in the room to turn to page six, paragraph 23, addendum 5. The Brazilians wanted to add “voluntary” after one phrase.

Eventually the meeting was steered back to the bigger picture. The negotiators wanted to know where the wider talks, and the draft were going.

from UK News:

Clashes and queues raise temperature in Copenhagen

With the clock ticking for world leaders to clinch a climate deal in Copenhagen, the last place you want to be is stuck at the back of a long queue.

But for thousands of delegates meeting in the Danish capital, that is exactly where they have spent endless hours this week.

They stood in the cold, braving the odd snow flurry, for hour after hour, waiting to be allowed into the conference centre on the edge of town where 193 countries are trying to thrash out a new deal on climate change.

Organisers said more than 45,000 people descended on a venue with a capacity for about 15,000.

Processing all those delegates, journalists and members of environmental groups took much longer than expected.

Some said they had waited for up to nine hours on Monday and Tuesday. There were reports of people in tears and heated arguments with officials.