Environment Forum

Global environmental challenges

Apr 21, 2010 11:40 EDT

Factbox: Rich nations’ greenhouse emissions down 2.2 percent

Photo

Greenhouse gas emissions by industrialized nations fell by 2.2 percent in 2008, the steepest fall since 1992 as the world economy slowed, a Reuters compilation shows.

Following are official national greenhouse gas emissions data submitted to the U.N. Climate Change Secretariat in recent days.

A few are not yet available. (Thousands of tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent unless stated, excludes land use, land use change and forestry):

(Notes: Turkey’s emissions not listed in common format. A few base years differ from 1990)

Compiled by Alister Doyle and Terje Solsvik in Oslo. Editing by Lin Noueihed.

COMMENT

Now here is one positive side effect of the world economic downturn. I wonder; are emissions from U.S. military craft included in our emissions, the country we operate in or not at all?

Posted by coyotle | Report as abusive
Dec 3, 2009 08:50 EST

What will they say in 2100 about what (didn’t) happen in 2009?

Photo

Hans Joachim Schellnhuber can speak eloquently and at length in English, German, French or Spanish about the perils of climate change. But the cold language of science in any of those languages melts away when the director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, 59, mentions his 18-month-old son and the impact that global warming will have on  the toddler’s life. 

“I’ve got a young son,” Schellnhuber says, pictured at the right with the boy, his wife and Britain’s Prince Charles on a visit to Potsdam in April. “I hope this all turns out to be wrong. I would be delighted if it turns out that we haven’t understood the system as well as we think we do, and that we might get a 20- to 30-year ‘breathing period’ when global warming slows or is even halted,” Schellnhuber said in an interview.

“I hope my son can live in a world where there won’t be massive conflicts because the sea level rises by a metre in his life time. I hope he’ll be able to have a happy life. But I’m growing increasingly worried.” 

I’ve had the chance to listen to Schellnhuber on several occasions in recent weeks and his infant son regularly comes up.

It is, for me at least, the drop-dead argument about climate change: What will our children or grandchildren say in the year 2100 about our generation and what happens, or does not happen, to slow climate change in 2009? What will they say about us when the world’s median temperature is 2 to 6 degrees higher and problems abound because of what didn’t happen in 2009?

Schellnhuber asks: “Would you put your child on a bus if you knew someone had cut the brake cable and there’s an 80 percent chance the bus will crash? But what if I say there’s an 80 percent chance the planet will be flooded even if it’s not for 100 years? Would you change your habits? The threat is far away. It’s an indissoluble problem.” 

Schellnhuber says he and fellow scientists have no choice but to warn about the threat of climate change. He says he gets zero pleasure over warning of the apocalypse and finds upsetting the hate mail he receives. “I didn’t pursue this issue – it found me,” he said. “But when you’re deep in your research, you can’t just say ‘this is all too much, it gets to me too much’. It does get to me.”

COMMENT

Clyde, there is no scientific data to suggest the Earth has cooled in the last 10 years. Roughly 10 of the last 14 years have been the hottest on record. Temperatures do not tell the whole story. Soil erosion, desertification, rising sea levels, retreating glacial ice and associated potable water loss are the big changes the planet has been experiencing for many decades. China now looses farmland the same way the U.S. did in the 1930s, wind/dust storms.

Sea levels are rising and swallowing up densely populated areas of Bangladesh and the Polynesian islands. Sea levels rise because all the glaciers and mountain ice have melted and flowed back into the seas.
What other than global warming could cause all the glaciers and mountain snow to recede?

Posted by eddieblack | Report as abusive
Sep 9, 2009 16:16 EDT

German ships navigate Northeast Passage – but is it a good thing?

Photo

Two German ships have successfully navigated their way through the fabled Northeast Passage on the first commercial journey by a western shipping company on the Northern Sea Route along Russia’s Arctic-facing northern shore — a new cost-cutting passageway from Asia to Europe made possible by climate change.  

 

The MV “Beluga Fraternity” and the MV “Beluga Foresight” (pictured above) arrived safely at Novvy Port/Yamburg in Russia at the delta of the river Ob on Monday after a 17-day trip through the icy cold but briefly ice-free Arctic Ocean after departing from Vladivostok on Aug. 21. The ships had earlier picked up their cargo in Ulsan, South Korea and after delivering it in Novvy Port will steam on to the Netherlands to complete the Pacific-to-Atlantic journey that explorers and merchants have been dreaming about for centuries. 

 

 

By taking advantage of the short two-month window of opportunity in August and September before the Arctic Ocean freezes over again, the journey from South Korean through the Northeast Passage (not to be confused with the Northwest Passage through Canada) to Europe cut about 3,300 nautical miles off the usual 11,000 nautical mile trip via the southern route through the Suez Canal. Instead of the usual 32-day journey on the southern route, the Northern Sea Route takes 23 days. The shorter distance cuts the cost of the journey considerably because less fuel was used — and thus less CO2 emitted. 

 

COMMENT

A perfect platform for people to present their thoughts,
Hi, thanks for sharing,
Great post…
great article ..
like you site..continue doing it..

Thanks for the tips

This is really helpful.

Jul 29, 2009 10:35 EDT

A speed limit for Germany?

Photo

In Germany, where many consider their cars sacred and most politicians on both the left and right refuse to consider tampering with the unlimited speed on the Autobahn for fear of hurting the car industry, the leader of the Greens party said it is high time for the country to join the rest of the civilised world and put an upper limit on Autobahn speeds — if for no other reason than to cut CO2 emissions

“The speed limit on German motorways will happen because it has to happen,” Cem Oezdemir, co-chair of the environmental Greens, said in an interview (click here for full story). “There will be an Autobahn speed limit as soon as the Greens are in power. We simply can’t afford it any longer to ignore any chance to reduce CO2 emissions. The interesting thing about a speed limit is that it would have an immediate impact on emissions. It would also save money, save lives and reduce the number of horrible injuries resulting from high-speed accidents. When you think about, it all the arguments speak in favour of a speed limit.”

Oezdemir, 43, said that aside from the powerful car lobby — which opposes a speed limit for fears it would damage the marketing mystique of carmakers like Porsche, BMW, Mercedes and Volkswagen — there are precious few reasons for letting cars continue drive at speeds of up to 200 kph and more: “The only argument against it is the pre-modern masculine dream of racing their cars at high speed.”

A study by Germany’s environmental protection office (Bundesumweltamt) found that a speed limit of 120 kph would lead to a 9 percent reduction in Germany’s CO2 emissions — practically overnight. It would also cut emissions of other pollutants by up to 28 percent. Greenpeace estimates that Germany could cut its CO2 emissions by some 40 million tonnes by 2020. There are speed limits of 130 kph on about half of Germany’s 12,000 km of motorway network. On unlimited sections cars often travel at speeds of up to 200 kph and some even reach 290 kph.

Some environmentalists reckon that CO2 reductions from cars worldwide could be even more substantial over the longer term. If consumers around the world were to stop buying the heavy, powerful cars built to race on German motorways and instead buy smaller, lighter and more fuel-efficient cars that aren’t built for such high speeds, emissions would not only be cut in Germany but in many other countries as well.

Germany, the world’s sixth largest emitter of greenhouse gases, likes to think of itself as a leader in the fight against climate change. But is that just hot air? Chancellor Angela Merkel, herself a former environment minister, has ruled out a speed limit: “It will not happen under me,” she said

As a number of foreign leaders have pointed out how can a country that refuses to introduce a speed limit to make a significant cut in its greenhouse gas emissions be taken seriously?

COMMENT

In this modern times when compromises will have to be made to collectively tackle the climate change debacle, I see changing times ahead. German car lobby or not I think most Germans will probably favour a speed limit if Merkel et al decide to introduce one. The car industry will not want to have negative PR for their CSR endeavours. Having said that, with the German car industry being innovative in technology to reduce car emissions, I have doubts if a 9% emissions reduction can be achieved with a speed limit of 120km/h…..I would have thought much less can be achieved.

Posted by VAS | Report as abusive
May 7, 2009 19:55 EDT

U.S. cities take lead on environmental action

Photo

“Green Cities,” a new report by a thinktank called Living Cities, examines how American cities have taken the lead on environmental issues in the absence of strong federal action. 

Based on a survey of 40 of the largest U.S. cities, the report points to progress in mandating more efficient city buildings and promoting recycling but notes that talk of creating “green jobs” has been more talk than action.  

Among the main findings:

* Four in five big cities say sustainability is among their top five priorities. Only about one in six says it is not.

* More than three quarters of big cities have or will soon have detailed plans on how to cut greenhouse gas emissions. Nearly all call for cuts of 10 to 20 percent in the next five to 10 years.

* The typical big city has between three and 10 staff members focused on climate change and sustainability. Several have only one staff member dedicated to these issues.

* Budgets vary widely, from $75,000 to $15 million. Most cities reported budgets of between $150,000 and $500,000. 

COMMENT

How is it two weeks later I am the only one again to post a comment. There seems to be lacking a tone of urgency in journalistic work today. Most articles published by news agencies focus on very specific areas of environmental impact. Greater emphasis should be given to the bigger picture. The issues of environment and economy are inseparable. A frank and honest discussion is missing from the media about the cost and sacrifice of change versus the benefits to humanity both economic and environmental in the future.

Nov 28, 2008 11:19 EST

Sue world leaders $1 billion for global warming?

Photo

In a global stunt, a U.S. environmental activist is poised to lodge a $1 billion damages class action lawsuit at the International Criminal Court (ICC) against all world leaders for failing to prevent global warming.

Activist and blogger Dan Bloom says he will sue world leaders for “intent to commit manslaughter against future generations of human beings by allowing murderous amounts of fossil fuels to be harvested, burned and sent into the atmosphere as CO2″.

He intends to lodge the lawsuit in the week starting Sunday, Dec. 6. 

The prosecutor’s office at the ICC, the world’s first permanent court (pictured below right) for war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity, says it is allowed to receive information on crimes that may fall within the court’s jurisdiction from any source.

“Such information does not per se trigger a judicial proceeding,” the prosecutor’s office hastened to add.

The question is: will or should the prosecutor take on the case?

One might argue in defence that world leaders are in fact trying to impose climate-saving measures. In Vienna last year, almost all rich nations agreed to consider cuts in greenhouse emissions of 25-40 percent below 1990 levels by 2020. Talks on a new climate treaty will be held in Poznan, Poland, from Dec. 1-12.

COMMENT

I’m not sure how this guy is being taken so seriously when he uses language like “manslaughter”. I agree that something should be done, but I think he is going about it the wrong way.

The government can prevent prevent global warming using various techniques such as adding a Pigouvian Tax on industries that pollute the environment and contribute to climate change, but if Dan Bloom wants to sue someone it should not be world leaders for not imposing the correct restrictions, but instead the corporations that contribute to global warming. Why sue governments when they are not the ones causing the problem. there are other organizations such as http://www.claimer.org/howwill that are trying to do just that. they should combine their claims together into a large lawsuit, but not at governments, but at the corporations.

Posted by mattao.b | Report as abusive
  •