Europe’s Renewable Power to Get its own Dedicated Grid

Even as practically all of the Northern Hemisphere goes through one of its biggest winter freezes on record, there is no hesitation in plans for Europe’s North Sea countries to set in motion a vast clean energy project. The Guardian’s Green Technology correspondent Alok Jha reports on Europe’s first electricity grid dedicated to renewable power, which will become a political reality this month.

Green Technology correspondent Alok Jha in the guardian.co.uk (3 January 2010):

Europe’s first electricity grid dedicated to renewable power will become a political reality this month, as nine countries formally draw up plans to link their clean energy projects around the North Sea.

It would connect turbines off the wind-lashed north coast of Scotland with Germany’s vast arrays of solar panels, and join the power of waves crashing on to the Belgian and Danish coasts with the hydro-electric dams nestled in Norway’s fjords.

The network, made up of thousands of kilometres of highly efficient undersea cables that could cost up to €30bn (£26.5bn), would solve one of the biggest criticisms faced by renewable power – that unpredictable weather means it is unreliable.

With a renewables supergrid, electricity can be supplied across the continent from wherever the wind is blowing, the sun is shining or the waves are crashing.

Connected to Norway’s many hydro-electric power stations, it could act as a giant 30GW battery for Europe’s clean energy, storing electricity when demand is low and be a major step towards a continent-wide supergrid that could link into the vast potential of solar power farms in North Africa.

By autumn, the nine governments involved – Germany, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Denmark, Sweden and Ireland and the UK – hope to have a plan to begin building a high-voltage direct current network within the next decade. It will be an important step in achieving the European Union’s pledge that, by 2020, 20% of its energy will come from renewable sources.

“We recognise that the North Sea has huge resources, we are exploiting those in the UK quite intensively at the moment,” said the UK’s energy and climate change minister, Lord Hunt. “But there are projects where it might make sense to join up with other countries, so this comes at a very good time for us.”

More than 100GW of offshore wind projects are under development in Europe, around 10% of the EU’s electricity demand, and equivalent to about 100 large coal-fired plants. The surge in wind power means the continent’s grid needs to be adapted, according to Justin Wilkes of the European Wind Energy Association (EWEA). An EWEA study last year outlined where these cables might be built and this is likely to be a starting point for the discussions by the nine countries.

Renewable energy is much more decentralised and is often built in inhospitable places, far from cities. A supergrid in the North Sea would enable a secure and reliable energy supply from renewables by balancing power across the continent.

Norway’s hydro plants – equivalent to about 30 large coal-fired power stations – could use excess power to pump water uphill, ready to let it rush down again, generating electricity, when demand is high. “The benefits of an offshore supergrid are not simply to allow offshore wind farms to connect; if you have additional capacity, which you will do within these lines, it will allow power trading between countries and that improves EU competitiveness,” said Wilkes.

The European Commission has also been studying proposals for a renewable-electricity grid in the North Sea. A working group in the EC’s energy department, led by Georg Wilhelm Adamowitsch, will produce a plan by the end of 2010. He has warned that without additional transmission infrastructure, the EU will not be able to meet its ambitious targets. Hunt said the EC working group’s findings would be fed into the nine-country grid plan.

The cost of a North Sea grid has not yet been calculated, but a study by Greenpeace in 2008 put the price of building a similar grid by 2025 at €15bn-€20bn. This would provide more than 6,000km of cable around the region. The EWEA’s 2009 study suggested the costs of connecting the proposed 100GW wind farms and building interconnectors, into which further wind and wave power farms could be plugged in future, would probably push the bill closer to €30bn. The technical, planning, legal and environmental issues will be discussed at the meeting of the nine this month.

“The first thing we’re aiming for is a common vision,” said Hunt. “We will hopefully sign a memorandum of understanding in the autumn with ministers setting out what we’re trying to do and how we plan to do it.”

All those involved also have an eye on the future, said Wilkes. “The North Sea grid would be the backbone of the future European electricity supergrid,” he said.

This supergrid, which has support from scientists at the commission’s Institute for Energy (IE), and political backing from both the French president, Nicolas Sarkozy, and Gordon Brown, would link huge solar farms in southern Europe – producing electricity either through photovoltaic cells, or by concentrating the sun’s heat to boil water and drive turbines – with marine, geothermal and wind projects elsewhere on the continent.

Scientists at the IE have estimated it would require the capture of just 0.3% of the light falling on the Sahara and the deserts of the Middle East to meet all Europe’s energy needs.

In this grid, electricity would be transmitted along high voltage direct current cables. These are more expensive than traditional alternating-current cables, but they lose less energy over long distances.

Hunt agreed that the European supergrid was a long-term dream, but one worth making a reality. The UK, like other countries, faced “huge challenges with our renewables targets,” he said. “The 2020 target is just the beginning and then we’ve got to aim for 2050 with a decarbonised electricity supply – so we need all the renewables we can get.”

A North Sea grid could link into grids proposed for a much larger German-led plan for renewables called the Desertec Industrial Initiative (DII). This aims to provide 15% of Europe’s electricity by 2050 or earlier via power lines stretching across desert and the Mediterranean.

The plan was launched last November with partners including Munich Re, the world’s biggest reinsurer, and some of Germany’s biggest engineering and power companies, including Siemens, E.ON, ABB and Deutsche Bank. DII is a $400bn (£240bn) plan to use concentrated solar power (CSP) in southern Europe and northern Africa.

This technology uses mirrors to concentrate the sun’s rays on a fluid container, the super-heated liquid then drives turbines to generate electricity. The technology itself is nothing new – CSP plants have been running in the United States for decades and Spain is building many – but the scale of the DII project would be its biggest deployment ever.

Source:  www.guardian.com.uk

2050 Emissions & Temperature Targets are “Barely Feasible”

Power from renewable sources such as wind farms will be important to fight climate change. Nevertheless, a new study says that even if we do everything possible to reduce emissions between now and 2050, keeping overall temperature increases below 2ºC is “barely feasible”. Cosmos Magazine identifies critical 2050 reductions that, if not met, could seriously complicate end-of-century targets with current energy sources.

Report from Agence France-Presse in Cosmos Magazine (12 January 2010):

Power from renewable sources such as wind farms will be important to fight climate change. Nevertheless, the study says that even if we do everything possible to reduce emissions between now and 2050, keeping overall temperature increases below 2ºC is “barely feasible”. WASHINGTON DC: World leaders should focus on reducing greenhouse gas emissions as much as possible over the next 40 years to avoid perilous warming, says a new study.

In the first research of its kind, analysts used a detailed energy system model to analyse the relationship between emissions levels in 2050 and chances of achieving end-of-century targets of 2 to 3ºC above the pre-industrial average.

U.N. climate talks in Copenhagen ended last month with a non-binding agreement to limit warming to 2ºC, but did not set binding targets to reduce the emissions of gasses that scientists say are heating up the world’s atmosphere to dangerous levels.

Critical reductions

The study, conducted with researchers from IIASA and the Energy Research Centre of the Netherlands, is published this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. It identified critical 2050 reductions that, if not met, could seriously complicate end-of-century targets with current energy sources.

Under one scenario, global emissions would need to be reduced by around 20% below 2000 levels by 2050 in order to meet the target. A second scenario, accounting for a more rapid increase in demand for land and energy, would require a 50% reduction by 2050.

But the authors concluded that achieving these reductions was “barely feasible” with known energy sources.

Even odds

“Even if we do everything possible to reduce emissions between now and 2050, we’d only have even odds of hitting the two-degree target – and then only if we also did everything possible over the second half of the century too,” said co-author Keywan Riahi, a researcher at the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) in Austria.

Lead co-author Brian O’Neill of the National Centre for Atmospheric Research noted that so long as an effective long-term strategy is adopted, emissions could be higher in 2050 than levels included in some proposals but still achieve the 2ºC goal in the long term.

“Setting mid-century targets can help preserve long-term policy options while managing the risks and costs that come with long-term goals,” he said. “Even if you agree on a long-term goal, without limiting emissions sufficiently over the next several decades, you may find you’re unable to achieve it. There’s a risk that potentially desirable options will no longer be technologically feasible, or will be prohibitively expensive to achieve.”

Source: www.cosmosmagazine.com

In the End (a word or two from the editor)

It must be hard for all scientists and climate change advocates in Europe and North America to even contemplate “global warming”, when they’re experiencing such freezing temperatures and major transport chaos due to snow and storms.

But whether we like it or not, the world is getting warmer, and the UK Met Office is telling its weather watchers (and listeners) that the current winter experience will become rarer in the future.  

Remember, the World Meteorological Organization said last month that 2000-2009 was the hottest decade since records began in 1850, and that 2009 would likely be the fifth warmest year on record. WMO data show that eight out of the 10 hottest years on record have all been since 2000.

But instead of sitting around enduring extreme weather conditions (parts of Australia have been experiencing “catastrophic” fire conditions this week), the world must sit up and do something about it.

Current political processes, globally and nationally, do not seem to be making a fist of climate change measures.

In my book “The ABC of Carbon”, I made a positive suggestion to set up a new international organisation, bringing together big business, global NGOs and key Government leaders. Here’s the relevant passage:

“Businesses have put into place policies and practices to cut emissions and energy use. No one has told the business community or industry what it must do, but they can see what’s on the horizon and they know that they have to share in the responsibility and the risks.

Business being business knows how to act decisively, even if not equipped with all the science it could do with. All credit to those business leaders — who know that leadership means taking risks and taking action. Taking action for their own good, as well as for their shareholders, partners, clients and customers.

Rupert Murdoch, Ray Anderson and Richard Branson would be three notables to stand out; their policies and declarations of action are noted elsewhere in this book.

It would make sense to get business people of their ilk to help form a new international organisation that brings together the energy and economic edge of business, the enthusiasm of NGOs and outstanding individuals, with the appropriate UN agencies, including the World Bank, to focus exclusively on carbon and climate change.

Let’s call it the International Carbon Enterprise, or ICE.”

When I first penned those words, I still had some hope that Bali and then Copenhagen would come up with some answers. More than a Roadmap. More than an Accord. A realistic and manageable plan for all countries (and businesses) to commit to. It hasn’t happened. And just as Professor Giddens says, maybe the current UN multi-lateral process must be bypassed.

So let’s not put another plan on ice. Let’s move to bring global business and global NGOs, together with the critical Governments (the major emitters) to form an action-oriented body. Now you’re talking and acting. Bring it on! – Ken Hickson

New Climate Hopes for 2010 & Decade Ahead

A random selection of our abc carbon express readers—a very important collection of people at the best of times —have responded to our invitation to express their hopes for the year and decade ahead.  Read what 35 business, scientific and community leaders have to say.

Here’s what some of our important readers had to say when asked what their hopes were for 2010 and decade ahead:

1. That we face reality now and start to plan and act seriously to achieve a low carbon-emission future.

       Peter C. Doherty, Nobel Prize winner for Physiology and Medicine in 1996 and author of “A Light History of Hot Air”

2.     My hope is that governments here and around the world can provide the price signal and other incentives that will inspire to the inventors, innovators, entrepreneurs and business leaders to drive the transformation to a low carbon, low polluting economy.

 Giles Parkinson, Green Chip Columnist, The Australian 

3.     My hope for 2010 is that the insane and politicised bickering over the validity of climate  science   is done and dusted and Australia, and indeed the world just get on with the hard job of progressing with the many real solutions on offer.  My hope for the decade ahead is that new technology and new economics give rise to clean, and equitable ways of achieving prosperity for all. We could aim for solar-energy surplus by 2020.  We could aim to replace fossil fuels completely by 2020.  By 2020 we could end poverty and protect the world’s forests forever.  We could do all this and more by 2020 if we had the global political will.  So that’s what I am hoping for.

       Dave Sag, Founder, Carbon Planet

4. During 2010 everyone will come to understand that we already have a process to remove billions of tonnes of CO2 from the atmosphere safely, quickly and cost-effectively – while at the same time reversing desertification, boosting biodiversity, enhancing global food security and improving the lives of hundreds of millions of people in rural and regional areas around our planet. This process is called changed grazing management and soil carbon.

     Tony Lovell, Founder, Soil Carbon

5.     I look forward to the first GW sized solar electricity plants permanently employing inland based Australians, in particular indigenous Australians, as a new focus for economic activity. In this coming decade, we will see the first solar plants that run 24 hours, clearing our air by avoiding emissions, running new electric vehicles, assisting the mining industry, and gradually eliminating our imports of petroleum fuel.

      Dr. David Mills, Chief Scientific Officer and Founder, Ausra

6. “I hope that the world, and Australia, starts to perceive and to act upon the reality that we all share a finite planet, and that the stability and security of our climate, water resources and ecosystems cannot be taken for granted.  I hope that by the end of 2010 we have an emissions reduction scheme in place, even an imperfect one, because time is short and it is more important to learn by doing than by arguing.” 

                        Dr Michael Raupach, CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research & Global Carbon Project  

7. I already know that 2010 is going to be a great year.  Despite the political landscape we are seeing companies continue to take a leadership role and get on with redefining their business, becoming more sustainable and also influencing others.  Personally my aspirations and hopes are on this work continuing and that the leaders of the world get a reality check.  2010 is also a special year as in March I am due to be a first time dad and becoming a parent has brought some clarity to the work that I am doing and the importance of me being able to leave a legacy for future generations. 

       Lee Stewart, Director, Change2

8. I will attend the General Assembly of Green Cross International in Geneva in January. My hope is that the organisation, and its Australian namesake, will continue to be a catalytic force for global conflict avoidance and sustainability initiatives.

       Khory McCormick, Minter Ellison Partner and Chairman Green Cross, Australia

9. I hope that in 2010, and in the decade beyond, that resilience to climate change is further recognised as a crucial element of prudent business management.  I also hope that the Australian Government becomes a driver of binding targets at the Mexico COP16 negotiations.  A final wish is that in 2010 the Australian Government announces free university education for those choosing to study climate change mitigation and adaptation. Its going to be a busy decade and we need all the help we can get. 

       Donovan Burton, Head of Local Government and Planning, Climate Risk

10.   That businesses and individuals consider the carbon and environmental footprint not only of operational issues such as energy consumption in buildings and homes, but also the embodied impacts of products, materials and resources in their buildings and lifestyles.’

        David Baggs, Technical Director & Principal Consultant, EcoSpecifier

      11.  I hope that in 2010 the misinformation, poor science, sloppy thinking and downright bloody-mindedness of climate change denialists will be overcome. While it is a perfectly valid and defensible to view the science of climate change with some scepticism, it is morally irresponsible to ignore the overwhelming evidence and to make at least some preparations for the strong possibility that the science is right. It is unfortunate that the debate has become political – denialism has become an article of faith in some circles, based on a misguided belief that short-term advantage is preferable to long-term action.

             Graeme Philipson, Research Director, Connection Research

     12.    I like self-fulfilling prophesies, so for 2010 and the beginning of a new decade  – ideas, debate and action based on commonsense and injecting real value back into markets and policies.  We can have a future that isn’t dominated by short-termism, greed and collateral damage, but now – not tomorrow – is the time to act.

              Fiona Wain, CEO, Environment Business Australia

     13.   In 2010, Sustainability will increasingly move from being talked about to practical actions by individuals, families and communities.  Rising concern about the negative impacts of global climate change will lead to sharp increases in sustainability expectations and actions.  People will realise that they must act for themselves.  It’s no use waiting for ‘others’ to move first.  Government and big business will too slow and too selfish to act fast enough.  The sum of individual behaviours will drive change towards sustainability as people strive to reduce their personal  ecological footprints: bicycle by bicycle, veggie patch by veggie patch, tonne of carbon offset by tonne of carbon offset, vote by vote…

             Julian Crawford, Director, EcoSTEPS

      14.  First - a hope: that we avoid experiencing the full “price” of carbon - not as applied by laws and markets, but by Nature. Second - a suggestion: that we come to accept that realistic, timely action on climate change by governments (especially in international fora) is only ever likely to be an echo of, and should never be a condition precedent to, commercial initiative and human ingenuity. Third – my recommended reading for all who are interested in this subject in 2010 – “Ultimatum” by Matthew Glass.

             Andrew Beatty, Partner, Baker McKenzie

      15.  In 2010, I intend to vocalise my sustainability passions in my interactions at work and outside work even more as I believe most people are receptive to receiving catalysts to take stronger personal actions. And I hope the Federal Government (and Opposition) implement an Australian emissions trading scheme. In the decade ahead, pessimistically, I think the world needs a clear crisis to shock it into action, but optimistically, I believe the latent potential of humankind to respond to that crisis is almost limitless. Necessity will drive innovation.

              Dean Comber, Manager Sustainability, Ergon Energy

      16.  The road ahead will be a collective one with the whole world’s attention now on Greening our work place and our lifestyle. Our thinking and habits will change hopefully by choice without intervention by Governments and other outside forces. The future is in our hands so let’s us all make it a long one.

                           Dean Harman, Managing Director, Natures Paper

     17.   We are on the cusp of significant philosophical change- issues of sustainability are slowly becoming not just words but actions! Slowly but surely these actions are taking hold, they are being implemented for the right reasons, long term sustainability that has a holistic outcome. This momentum must be maintained for businesses to move from Industrial age thinking to Design age thinking and action. Actions that are consistent with a sustainable future. However cynicism is still extremely high as evidenced by the Copenhagen outcomes and closer to home the businesses that are in essence the purveyors of Green-wash! These are the businesses that only use Industrial age thinking to further their own ends and maintain general cynicism! In my opinion the next decade needs to be of action not rhetoric – a base has been built and we now need to continue to build from here! 

             Nick Alford, Director, City Smart, Brisbane

      18.  That people will stop being drawn into pointless arguments about global warming and instead get busy working together on (among other things) eliminating the inappropriate use of fossil fuels. 

             Janis Birkeland, Professor of Architecture, Queensland University of Technology

       19. My hope is that by the end of 2010, heads of state will sign a treaty to greatly reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 and beyond, reflecting a tidal wave of support by people around the world for this result. I will continue to do my bit to help make this happen. I hope this comes true! Best wishes for the year ahead – hopefully a greener one that 2009.

                          Imogen Zethoven, Director, Pew Environment Group, Australia

       20. I hope 2010 sees the global community take a new tack with climate change issues.  This year I hope to see the G20 create a new governance framework for active cooperation on emissions reductions among its members (complementing not superseding the UN COP process).  Among its strategies would be an emphasis on mixing regulatory and market innovation, extensive public education and engagement on the issues, and an open minded approach to relevant technologies.  The main problem with climate change is that its solution means human change.  I would hope that because the major players (from both the developed and developing world) achieved a shared practical  agenda in the early years of the decade, the global community would be on track to achieve no worse than a 2 degree warmer Earth.  An optimist can hope for no more.

Professor John Cole, Director, Australian Centre for Sustainable Business and Development University of Southern Queensland

        21. In 2010 our choice is between being proactive and making the future we want, or having thrust upon us a future we may or may not want. It’s a choice between very hard work to create a better, fairer and more sustainable world, or waiting idly for the devils of unsustainability to roll their dice!

Richard Cassels, Director Climate Leadership

       22. We enter a decade where the politics of Asia will be formative for global environmental strategy.  Demand for Australia’s extractive industries driven by Asia is likely to ensure that we remain among the worst Greenhouse gas emitting culprits (per capita).  The USA (only 4.5% of the world’s population) and European Union (7%) are unlikely to achieve their desired emission reduction targets as they endeavour not to restrict their own economic recovery.   Developing nation population demographics and food supply are likely to re-emerge as core global issues central to the climate management debate and preparedness for humanitarian disaster relief.

       23. My hopes for 2010 and the decade ahead are simple. Focus on sustainability and peace.  All else is irrelevant.

             Barbara Carseldine, author of “Creating a culture with a reverence for water”

       24. I’d like to see the world’s countries display more empathy towards the planet and come up with an agreement to suppress GHG emissions.         I hope that my organisation embraces the area of energy/carbon management more fully this year;  I see my career path changing this year, I want  to be fully involved in this area of great importance.

Lucas Skoufa, Lecturer in Energy and Carbon Management, University of Queensland

       25. I hope we stop talking and start acting.  I hope we stop waiting for someone else to fix things and start realising that we have all the climate change solutions we need.  I hope we stop worrying how hard it is and start seeing it’s really easy.  I hope we show how smart we really are.

Freddy Sharpe, Chief Executive Officer, Climate Friendly

       26. The negotiations at COP-15 did not fail because of scientific uncertainty or lack of policy options: all 193 national delegations understand the fact of human-induced climate warming and the myriad of ways of reversing people pollution.  There was no agreement because our leaders believe they have no mandate: they think we do not want to change.  In 2010 it is ESSENTIAL that we change this.

             Ann Henderson-Sellers, formerly Director of World Climate Research Program, now ARC Professional Research Fellow at Macquarie University

       27. My hope for 2010 and the decade ahead is that politicians and organisations will quickly stop treading water and stop spinning conflicting policies and actions. It is necessary to move forward positively to reap the benefits (including the necessity) of ceasing unstainable practices producing increases in Greenhouse gases before a possible tipping point for abrupt climate change is reached.

                         Lloyd Stümer, Managing Director, Wind Power Queensland Pty Ltd

       28. My hopes for 2010 and the decade ahead: We need to actively invest in the transition to a low carbon economy.  To that end I hope that the issues impacting on the low Renewable Energy Certificate price are resolved quickly, so that we start to see the necessary investment in large-scale renewable energy projects in Australia.

                          Megan Wheatley, Business Development Manager, Suzlon Energy Australia Pty Ltd

       29. “We believe the next decade will see the movement towards a low carbon economy and environmental sustainability reach a tipping point. Popular consciousness will reject insatiable consumption; traditional ideologies and institutions will be challenged. This decade will set the foundation for a new era of humanity.”

                          Adrian Vannisse & Werner Murray, Climate First          

       30. My hopes for 2010 and the decade ahead are that governments and businesses will not only take unprecedented actions to accelerate the change of mentalities toward a more environmentally responsible society (“less consumption, less pollution!”), but also strongly commit to support a rapid integration of clean technologies and renewable energies.

                          Philippe Reboul, Director, Electric Vehicle Conference

       31. For 2010 I want to see real action on climate change, not just talk.  I believe the CPRS is compromised but it is better than nothing so I would like to see the legislation passed.  My hope is that by the end of the next decade that we will accept that our choices can have dramatic impacts on the environment – good and bad – and then that everyone makes better choices as part of our every day, and  that the choices are as simple as putting on a seat belt in a car.  In so doing, that we all live more gently on the planet.

                         Sara Gipton, CEO, Greenfleet

       32. Within the next decade my hope is that geothermal energy will achieve its commercial potential providing Australia with base load, zero emission power allowing (amongst other things) zero emission, electric vehicles to become commonplace sights on Australia’s roads.

                          Damian McGreevy, consultant &  former Government policy advisor

      33. This year and this decade I’d like to see sustainable environmental management be considered for what it is: a serious and complex policy challenge instead of being variously treated as a cause, a fad, a fashion, a political opportunity or a vehicle for protest and dissent.  My hope is it assumes its rightful place as an unremarkable but essential pillar of good government and good business.

                         Matthew Warren, Chief Executive Officer, Clean Energy Council

       34. My your hopes for 2010 and the decade ahead are that business proactively lead the charge to the new low carbon economy in a practical and common sense manner. The ‘Lean and Green’ approach provides a practical framework which will deliver sensible, commercial outcomes for business. Businesses should be more pro-active in using  Lean to go Green!  

                          Grant Forsdick, Director, Level 5 Lean

       35. My hopes are that I work myself out of business! PAX’s mission is to help create a sustainable world by developing leaders that understand and work towards a sustainable future. Right now we’ve completed a market exploration survey that indicates that for-profit and not-for-profit organisations alike are struggling with simply understanding sustainability in their own contexts. There is no doubt that organisations need quite substantial help with this, but they are crying out for both meaningful and practical assistance, a difficult combination for experts who are usually good at either one or the other. There is an inherent problem with capitalism without meaning in a sustainable world. This is both a philosophical problem and an ethical leadership issue. I am looking forward to helping leaders and organisations through the labyrinth!

Louise Metcalf, Director, Pax Leader Labs

Leaders Must Respond to People Power

Australian climate change guru Professor Ian Lowe was heartened by what he experienced at Copenhagen but says now it is time for our leaders to follow the lead of the people, while a US analyst shows how the international accord matches his “Fab 5” desired outcomes.

First, Ian Lowe’s message of hope for 2010 & decade ahead:

“My main hope for 2010 is that the Australian government will recognise its responsibility and put forward a serious package of measures to produce real reductions of our greenhouse gas emissions. For the next decade, it is that we will become a global force for good by setting an ambitious domestic 2020 target of at least 40 per cent and working toward achieving it, by providing generous assistance to our Asia-Pacific neighbours to help them develop using clean energy and by committing to end the export of coal.

Second, an article by Ian Lowe:

The Copenhagen climate change conference was a significant step forward. Over 100 world leaders agreed that urgent concerted action is needed to slow climate change. For the first time, all the major greenhouse gas emitters have agreed to be part of a global accord to tackle the problem. That includes the USA, which never ratified the Kyoto Protocol, and the large developing countries that had no obligations under that agreement such as China, India, Brazil and South Africa. The Accord still needs to be turned into a treaty with legal force. There is a clear timetable for that to happen by next year’s meeting in Mexico.

I was heartened at Copenhagen to find that everyone understood the importance of the issue. Nobody takes seriously the climate change denialists, a motley crew who don’t even agree among themselves on anything except their starting point that we should do nothing. Every week the science is clearer and more alarming. It says we have only five to ten years to turn the upward emissions trend into a downward trend. The arguments are about which nations or industries will do what, and who will pay for the transition.

To slow down climate change, two elements are necessary. The first is the commitment by major developing nations to rein in the anticipated growth of their pollution. The equally important component is that developed nations – including Australia – have to put forward serious plans for the scale of emissions cuts needed, toward 40 per cent by 2020. As US President Obama said at the last night of the conference, the targets being put forward today are not sufficient. The science demands more aggressive action. Kevin Rudd has to stand up to the big polluters and set serious emission reduction targets.

The good news is that technical studies presented here for the UK, Denmark, California, Europe as a whole and even the world all came to similar conclusions. Developed countries can halve their energy use in the next twenty years with no loss of material living standards. The reduced energy demand can be supplied entirely by a mix of renewable energy technologies. One Stanford University study found world demand in 2030 could be powered entirely by renewable energy. That requires governments to stand up to the coal industry and the used car salesmen peddling nuclear power. Those old approaches have no role in the clean energy future.

As well as reduction commitments from the industrialised world and corresponding commitments to meaningful action by the large developing, the Copenhagen Accord puts money on the table to help poorer countries adapt to climate change and manage the transition to clean energy.

Pollution reductions must be measurable, reportable and verifiable. Everyone agrees with the principle. The challenge is finding mechanisms that command respect without infringing national sovereignty. The problems of nuclear technology remind us how difficult those requirements are.

While the Accord contains promising elements, including a commitment to try to keep the increase in average global temperature below two degrees, there is no stated target year for global emissions to peak. At least the conference rejected proposals to pervert the so-called clean development mechanism to include unproven technologies, like carbon capture and storage, and the proven dirty option of nuclear power.

Australia played a positive role at the conference, a great relief to me after the fifteen years when we actively obstructed progress. Our strong links with the USA, China and the European nations enabled us to propose creative solutions to the obstacles.

Kevin Rudd now has to produce a package of measures to effect real change in Australia. It must go well beyond the proposals in the watered-down CPRS. That was still too demanding for the Opposition and brought the denial faction to power in the Coalition, so the government has a real political challenge. But the conditions set by the Rudd government for going to a 25 per cent target have largely been met. The science says we should go further. There is no economic or social reason to delay.

Opinion polls show that the community understands the issue and wants to see concerted action. Tens of thousands of Australians joined the Walk Against Warming on 12 December. Huge numbers have insulated their houses, bought solar panels and shifted to public transport. Now it is time for our leaders to follow the lead of the people.

Ian Lowe is emeritus professor of science, technology and society at Griffith University and president of the Australian Conservation Foundation.

Source: www.acfonline.org.au

Third, Climate Change Insights from Jon Sohn:

Thanks to David Pointon of Sustainable Action for passing on this article by Jon D. Sohn, who attended Copenhagen for McKenna Long & Aldridge LLP, an international law firm of attorneys and public policy advisors based in Washington, US.

Heading into Copenhagen, I provided a “Fab 5” of necessary outcomes for COP-15 to be a success.  The Copenhagen Accord took a number of pragmatic steps on finance, accountability and endorsing market-based approaches to tackling the challenge of global climate change.  The Accord will likely play well in the US Senate with a view to getting more support for domestic action through cap-and-trade legislation as it brings China, India, Brazil and South Africa along in bending the curve of business-as-usual emissions.  It also establishes accountability procedures for developing countries to report on those obligations through the Conference of the Parties.  Additionally, the next commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol, never popular in domestic politics, appears dubious at best.  So these issues play well domestically.

However, in the trade-off for these pragmatic steps, the United Nations Conference of the Parties process was left in tatters.  While most countries signed on to the Copenhagen Accord, it was done so with a disdain for the process and skepticism for the result.  It will be difficult to regain the level of political momentum and multilateral engagement that was achieved in the lead up to Copenhagen through the UN.  Science-based targets to reduce emissions backed by a legally binding UN treaty to fulfill all commitments were lost, for now, in that effort.

President Obama is taking a lot of heat for the outcome.  Success for the Obama Administration now lies in proving it can actually deliver real action on 1. domestic mitigation, 2. international finance and 3. working positively with China and other emerging economies on real results, thus justifying their tough negotiating position in Copenhagen.  Otherwise, the Copenhagen Accord will be seen as all bark and no bite as many critics are already claiming.  Whether the bite is real depends on a mixture of Presidential leadership, domestic politics and international pressure.

Global efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions are in a fundamentally different place than they were before Copenhagen.  Pledges to reduce or curb emissions are now a global endeavor, not one just for developed nations.  At the end of the day, however, the Copenhagen Accord is a bunch of words on paper.  Emerging governance structures and actions to ensure fulfillment of the Accord will determine real success.  Perhaps, Michael Levi of the Council on Foreign Relations assessed the wake of Copenhagen best: “The climate-treaty process isn’t going to die, but the real work of coordinating international efforts to reduce emissions will primarily occur elsewhere.”  The level of importance for the next COP in Mexico City remains to be seen.

Below the “Fab 5” goals are repeated with accompanying analysis of how they line up with language from the Copenhagen Accord.

1. Aggressive Emission Reduction Goals

Developed countries will need to agree upon on ambitious greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction targets.  The IPCC suggests that this implies a mid-term goal for 25-40 percent GHG cuts by 2020 based on a 1990 level baseline and 80 percent by 2050.  Collective action will need to be supplemented by individual national commitments such as those put forward by the United States and United Kingdom in recent days.  Likewise, developing countries will need to agree to taking GHG mitigation actions that are appropriate in their national development contexts ranging from shifting to low carbon power strategies to reducing rates of deforestation.  Some observers see a collective goal that recognizes the scientific view that the increase in global average temperature above pre-industrial levels should not exceed two degrees Celsius as a more politically feasible outcome than the target cuts noted above.

Copenhagen Accord: “We agree that deep cuts in global emissions are required according to science, and as documented by the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report with a view to reduce global emissions so as to hold the increase in global temperature below 2 degrees Celsius, and take action to meet this objective consistent with science and on the basis of equity.”

Analysis: As predicted, the tougher decisions about collective commitments to reduce emissions by the above noted 2020 and 2050 targets were left for another day, in favor of a 2 degrees Celsius approach.  It is difficult to reconcile the scientific reality with the necessary policy goals set in the Copenhagen Accord.  There is now a February 2010 deadline for countries to sign up their individual commitments in an Annex to the Copenhagen Accord.  For the first time, both developing and developed countries will put forward such commitments, yet there is doubt they will add up to either the IPCC figures or the 2 degrees goal.

2. Climate Finance Commitments

Countries need to agree upon climate finance mechanisms that will provide “fast start” funds of approximately $10-$12 to developing countries from 2010 to 2012.  This is viewed as a down payment of good faith towards future actions by developing countries.  The architecture for longer-term, predictable funding for climate adaptation and mitigation – including forestry and technology support will also need to be put into place.  However, it is less feasible for specific dollar amounts, governance regimes and sources of funding to be agreed upon in Copenhagen with respect to longer-term climate finance.

Copenhagen Accord: “The collective commitment by developed countries is to provide new and additional resources, including forestry and investments through international institutions, approaching USD 30 billion for the period 2010-2012 with balanced allocation between adaptation and mitigation.”

“In the context of meaningful mitigation actions and transparency on implementation, developed countries commit to a goal of mobilizing jointly USD 100 billion dollars a year by 2020 to address the needs of developing countries.”

“We decide that the Copenhagen Green Climate Fund shall be established as an operating entity of the financial mechanism of the Convention to support projects, programme, policies and other activities in developing countries related to mitigation including REDD-plus, adaptation, capacity building, technology development and transfer.”

Analysis: The Accord went further than I anticipated in terms of setting a 2020 target for $100 billion annually, and came in on target in terms of the “fast start” funds.  The challenge will be ensuring that these funds are truly “new and additional,” and words are followed by actions in the implementation of these measures.  The Green Fund concept provides an overarching framework and governance structure but will need significant negotiation on the road to a binding legal treaty.

3. Accountability for Commitments

Measurable, Reportable and Verifiable (MRV) national commitments and actions agreed at Copenhagen are a lynchpin of success.  If a global agreement will be more than rhetoric, there simply needs to be a standardized methodology to “trust but verify” with a view to equitable burden sharing in the transformation to a global low carbon economy.  Countries need to establish common international methodologies to track and report emissions and subsequent measures to reduce emissions.

Copenhagen Agreement: Developed countries: “Delivery of reductions and financing by developed countries will be measured, reported and verified in accordance with existing and any further guidelines adopted by the Conference of the Parties, and will ensure that accounting of such targets and finance is rigorous, robust and transparent.”

Developing countries: Mitigation actions will be subject to “provisions for international consultations and analysis.”  Mitigation actions that seek international support will be “record in a registry along with relevant technology, finance and capacity building support” and “subject to international measurement, reporting and verification in accordance with guidelines adopted by the Conference of the Parties.”

Analysis: The fundamental goal of moving towards a more transparent and accountable system for reporting and verifying emission reductions was achieved.  The language brings both developed and developing countries along.  Through a US political lens, getting China and other emerging economies to agree to this language will assist in efforts to persuade the Senate that all Parties will move towards reductions and thus lessen perceptions of competitive disadvantage.

4. Signals for a Global Carbon Market

Private capital needs to see signals that a process of linking nations in post-Kyoto Protocol market-mechanism efforts that reduce emissions will continue.  In order for private capital to continue the evolution of a liquid, cost-effective mitigation market begun under the Clean Development Mechanism and Emissions Trading systems, political signals of this approach must be provided in Copenhagen.  This will allow the evolution of so-called flexible mechanisms towards at scale reductions in the most cost-effective manner possible.

Copenhagen Agreement: “We decide to pursue various approaches, including opportunities to use markets, to enhance the cost-effectiveness of, and to promote mitigation actions. Developing countries, especially those with low emitting economies should be provided incentives to continue to develop on a low emission pathway.”

Analysis: Market mechanisms to reduce emissions and contain costs remained alive through the Copenhagen Accord.  However, the value of such mechanisms is only as good as the demand created by aggressive emission reduction targets and the rules that ensure environmental integrity of such approaches.  Copenhagen did not advance these goals and such mechanisms will largely fall to national approaches and a future legal treaty.

5. Political Agreement With a View to Legal Agreement

There is broad consensus that a political agreement is the likely outcome from Copenhagen but ultimately enforcement requires a legal agreement.  Towards this goal, it is anticipated the countries will politically commit to finalizing a more legally binding agreement in 2010.  In the US context, this approach allows the Obama Administration to sequence working collaboratively with the Senate on a final energy and climate legislative package prior to promising what cannot be delivered at the international level.

Copenhagen Agreement: “We call for an assessment of the implementation of this Accord to be completed by 2015, including in light of the Convention’s ultimate objective.  This would include consideration of strengthening the long-term goal referencing various matters presented by the science, including in relation to temperature rises of 1.5 degrees Celsius.”

Analysis: There is no commitment to move towards a legally binding agreement in 2010, but rather just an assessment of the effectiveness of the Accord in 2015.  While nothing prevents the Parties from moving towards a legal treaty by the next COP in Mexico City, it is by no means a certainty.

Source: www.climatechangeinsights.com

Hottest Decade For Australia & Looming Global Climate Losses 

Australia experienced its hottest decade on record from 2000 to 2009 due to global warming, the nation’s bureau of meteorology announced, while Munich Re AG, one of the world’s largest reinsurers, said economic and insured losses caused by climate change will continue to grow, calling for a near-term deal for a substantial reduction in global greenhouse-gas emissions.

Michael Perry for Reuters World Environment News (6 January 2009):

SYDNEY – Australia experienced its hottest decade on record from 2000 to 2009 due to global warming, the nation’s bureau of meteorology said, as annual summer bushfires again burn drought lands and destroy homes.

The average temperature in Australia over the past 10 years was 0.48 degrees Celsius above the 1961-1990 average, said the Bureau of Meteorology said in its annual climate statement.

And 2010 is forecast to be even hotter, with temperatures likely to be between 0.5 and 1 degrees above average.

“We’re getting these increasingly warm temperatures, not just for Australia but globally. Climate change, global warming is clearly continuing,” said bureau climatologist David Jones.

“We’re in the latter stages of an El Nino event in the Pacific Ocean and what that means for Australian and global temperatures is that 2010 is likely to be another very warm year — perhaps even the warmest on record.”

Environment Minister Peter Garrett used the report to attack opposition politicians for blocking the government’s key climate policy, a carbon emissions trading scheme (ETS) aimed at reducing greenhouses gases causing global warming.

“Australia is one of the hottest and driest inhabited places on earth and our environment and economy will be one of the hardest and fastest hit by climate change,” said Garrett.

“Today’s statement finds that the patterns of the last year and the decade are consistent with global warming. It (passing the ETS) is in the national interest and it is in the interest of the world,” he said in a statement.

The government has promised to reintroduce its ETS legislation to parliament in February, a move which may trigger an early election in 2010 if the legislation is again defeated.

An election is due in late 2010.

EXTREME BUSHFIRES, HEATWAVES

The year 2009 will be remembered for “extreme bushfires, dust-storms, lingering rainfall deficiencies, areas of flooding and record-breaking heatwaves,” said the bureau.

In fact, 2009 was Australia’s second warmest year on record, with the annual mean temperature 0.90 degrees Celsius above the 1961-1990 average, driven by three record-breaking heatwaves that caused Australia’s most deadly bushfires, killing 173 people.

“To get one of them in a year would have been unusual. To get three is just really quite remarkable,” said Jones.

Outback Australia was warming more quickly than other parts of the country, with some inland areas warming at twice the rate of coastal regions, said the bureau.

But as Australia warmed, with large tracts of the country battling a decade-long drought, the northern part of the country was becoming wetter, said the bureau.

Floods now cover large parts of northern New South Wales state and the tropical state of Queensland.

“Australia as a whole has been getting warmer for about 50-60 years and it’s actually been tending to get wetter,” said Jones. “You see this paradox — the country, particularly in the north, it’s getting wetter but is also warming up.”

Source: www.planetark.org

By Ulrike Dauer in Wall Street Journal:

FRANKFURT — Munich Re AG, one of the world’s largest reinsurers, said economic and insured losses caused by climate change will continue to grow, and called for a near-term deal to ensure a substantial reduction in global greenhouse-gas emissions.

“We need as soon as possible an agreement that significantly reduces greenhouse gas emissions because the climate reacts slowly and what we fail to do now will have a bearing for decades to come,” said management board member Torsten Jeworrek.

“In the light of these facts, it is very disappointing that no breakthrough was achieved at the Copenhagen climate summit in December 2009,” Mr. Jeworrek said, pointing to the marked increase–more or less tripling–in major global weather-related natural disasters since 1950.

Reinsurers and primary insurers provide insurance protection against losses caused by large natural and man-made disasters.

Munich Re said it will step up its own initiatives in the matter, including investments of up to €2 billion in renewable energy and a strong commitment to the Sahara solar power project Desertec, which aims to come up with a feasible plan for generating solar power in the Sahara within the next three years.

Munich Re said losses caused by natural disasters cost the global insurance industry around $22 billion in 2009, helped by substantially lower U.S. hurricane activity than a year earlier, when the insurance industry had to pay around $50 billion for damage caused by natural disasters such as winter storms, hurricanes, cyclones, floods and earthquakes.

The figures are similar to estimates by Swiss peer Swiss Reinsurance Co., which estimated at the end of November that the bill the insurance industry had to pay for natural disaster losses in 2009 amounted to around $21 billion.

Munich Re said “severe weather events accounted for 45%, or nearly half, of global insured losses” in 2009. It also said this year’s lower bill for natural disasters and the absence of “severe hurricanes and other mega-catastrophes” shouldn’t be taken lightly, as there was a large number of moderately severe natural disasters.

“In particular, the trend toward an increase in weather-related catastrophes continues, while there has fundamentally been no change in the risk of geophysical events such as earthquakes,” said Peter Hoeppe, who heads Munich Re’s Geo Risks Research unit. 

Earlier this month, leaders of the U.S., China and other major economies agreed on a new climate accord in Copenhagen, though many have said it wasn’t ambitious enough and a future round of negotiations is now required to hash out the details. The accord contained no specific targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. A proposed 50% cut that was in earlier drafts was removed.

The pact calls on developed nations to provide $30 billion to help developing nations deal with the effects of climate change from 2010 to 2012. By 2020, rich nations aim to jointly mobilize $100 billion a year for poor nations.

Under the deal, countries have pledged to try to keep atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide low enough to keep average global temperatures less than two degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels; many scientists say breaching this threshold could have catastrophic consequences. But the agreement doesn’t specify how countries will achieve that goal.

Source: www.online.wsj.com

Agricultural Revolution Plus Social & Economic Reforms

Prime Carbon’s Ken Bellamy predicts 2010 will see the beginning of the 3rd Agricultural Revolution and the decade ahead will be a period of unprecedented social and economic reform.    “In-soil photosynthesis will, I believe, allow us to work around some of the critical hurdles we face.” The Economist has its say on the subject, too.

Contribution and comments from Ken Bellamy:

“In my view, 2010 and the decade ahead stand to be a period of unprecedented social and economic reform.   2009 saw an international revisiting of the concepts of Social Enterprise at a governmental, commercial and grassroots level which has not been seen since the industrial revolution.

 “The Copenhagen discussions — where, for the first time in modern history, 193 nations gathered to discuss social issues ahead of political agendas, and went away agreeing that the social issues outweighed the political–was a milestone for what I see as a groundswell movement which will drive economic and political planning for the next century.

 “There has never been a time where our survival was so clearly challenged.  We feared our survival was under attack in the atomic age.  Nature is now showing us how much pedantry we have been engaged in.  We do not shape our ecosystem’s destiny, we participate in it — and affect it negatively or positively.  Our choice now is to follow the dinosaurs or reinvent how we live in this dynamic, integrated, randomly organised system of life.

 “A key feature of 2009, which I believe will gain burgeoning strength in 2010, is a re-look at the scientific method and how that construct has been hijacked over the past few decades to make us slaves to an ever-less relevant set of data-controllers.  There is a clear need for generalised, non-conformist thought as we face decisions and barriers which cannot be solved by the current scientific model and must be addressed by thought which goes beyond the manner of knowledge gathering which got us into the fix we are in. 

“Science itself needs a re-think.  Most important in this is the fact that everyone can know, everyone can contribute to what we all know and we must go forward collectively in our learning, not wait for ‘scientists’ (or their economic controllers to dole out what we should think).  The ‘gate-keepers’ of data have produced thinly distributed benefits to a privileged slice of our society–along with a series of destructive forces and constructs which now threaten our very survival (GM-based food monopolies, Green Revolution food dependancies, un-killable super-bugs, depleted soils, vanishing soils, food without substance and ever-more-efficient means to kill each other all fill this space).  I believe the rest of society will inhabit what happens next.

“2010 will see the beginning of the 3rd Agricultural Revolution.  In-soil photosynthesis will, I believe, allow us to work around some of the critical hurdles we face.”

Note from the Editor:

Ken Bellamy is the Townsville man we featured in a Profile in November, who has been hailed for a breakthrough in the biological enhancement of photosynthesis – thereby enabling plants to flourish with less water – and is also leading the charge for carbon farming in Australia and globally.

His early innovative work led to the establishment of VRM in 1997 as a biotech company offering an alternative to genetic modification in the management of biological risks.  VRM’s products and processes have gained respect in a range of industrial and agricultural situations since.

He also founded Prime Carbon (in 2004) as a vehicle to facilitate the quantification and sale of Carbon Offsets which directly support land management change to enhance soil quality on farms and other land. These measures for social and scientific support for landholders, has become a leading example of the power of community and business in dealing with the issues of climate change.

Source: www.primecarbon.com.au

The Economist (30 December 2009):

FOR people who see stopping deforestation as the quickest climate-change win, Copenhagen seemed a success. Although there is still work to be done on the initiative known as REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation), the deal struck in Copenhagen made it into a real thing, not just an idea. The notion of reducing net deforestation to zero was not explicitly mentioned, but it looks much more credible than it did two years ago.

As well as giving heart to the protectors of trees, this outcome is encouraging for people whose focus is not on forests but on fields. Climate and agriculture matter to each other in several ways.

On the downside, farming is a cause of deforestation, and also emits greenhouse gases in its own right—perhaps 14% of the global total. On the upside, agriculture can also dispose of heat-trapping gases, by increasing the carbon content of soils.

And because farmers (unlike say, coal-producers) feel the effects of the changes their activities may be causing, they have a role in adapting to climate change. Farms, particularly marginal ones, are the first to suffer when the climate shifts; increase their resilience and you help a lot of people. Whether the aim is adaptation to climate change or slowing it, there is an obvious need for more research on the benign contributions that agriculture can make. For people who are seized of this need, there was a welcome boost on December 16th when 21 countries pledged $150 billion to a Global Research Alliance on Agricultural Greenhouse Gases.

One of the attractions of a focus on agriculture is that even poor countries have farms; in some cases credits for carbon newly locked away in their soil may be a more plausible way of attracting money than rewards for low-carbon industrialisation. A more remote possibility is that such countries will earn credits by hosting efforts to pump carbon dioxide out of the air and store it away.

Such “geoengineering” is still seen as far-fetched and in some circles misguided, but a reference to it was made in the Copenhagen documents. It was cited as a possible future direction for the Clean Development Mechanism, which provides credits for carbon-saving projects in poorer countries. In the aftermath of negotiations with a hint of slash-and-burn, new seeds may be taking root.

Source: www.economist.com

Drastically Cut Deforestation, Population & Fossil Fuel Use

Flemming Bermann, Director of the UK’s Carbon-info.org –  Europe’s largest global warming and climate change website – hopes to see a complete stop to tropical deforestation,  a significant reduction in world population and a massive investment in green energy technology, reducing consumption of fossil fuels 60-70% within the next 10-20 years.

By Flemming Bermann:

What have we achieved in the last 10 years and what would we like to see happening in the next decade? 

The last 10 years has been largely wasted. The political establishment has spend the decade hiding behind the ineffective Kyoto protocol, while getting the scientific community to do all the hard work – proving beyond any argument that global warming is real and man-made.

And when finally there were no-where left to hide and our so called leaders had to deliver an effective agreement to reduce CO2 – in Copenhagen for just a few weeks ago - it became clear to everyone just how ineffective the political establishment, tools and process are for dealing with a global problem like global warming.  

In short, the political establishment failed. The political approach in Copenhagen - scoring points off each other, blaming anyone and everyone, and general horse trading to avoid just a few extra % reduction in CO2 emissions – exposed just how incompetent and rooted our leaders are in the capitalistic model, which are the very economic model that brought us to the brink of irreversible climate change.

So what do we wish for in the next 10 years?

Well, for one a more effective and grownup political process, which is focused on delivering real results (real reductions in CO2 levels) through a new approach to global corporation. Not rich versus poor. Not east versus west. But real corporation through the realisation that no-one wins if we don’t work together and stop treating this global problem as something that can be resolved by placing a bunch of capitalistic leaders in a room and hope for the best. 

We also hope that the political process will focus on a few major win-win areas such as:

- Complete stop to tropical deforestation and replanting of major forests in every country on the planet.

- Significant reduction in world population. A minimum of 25% by 2030 shared equally by all nations.

- Massive investment in green energy technology, which will see consumption of fossil fuel based energy reduced with 60-70% within the next 10-20 years.

These three measures will ensure that we can remove some of the existing CO2 already in the atmosphere, while rapidly reducing the possibility that any new CO2 is being released.

Anything less is really a waste of time and just delaying tactics or lack of understanding of the huge challenge facing us.

In the last 12 months Carbon-info.org has mainly focused on two projects:

1) We have entered into an important partnership with AEECL (A consortium of European Zoos and Universities dedicated to the conservation of Madagascar’s lemurs) and working with them to promote a conservation project that aims to save the remaining 3000 blue-eyed black lemurs from extinction.

The project focuses on planting 100000s of new tropical trees. The trees will provide much needed forest corridors between fragmented groups of lemurs as well as providing the population with food such as fruit and berries.

However, Carbon-info.org has become involved because the project has other benefits, which directly link with our own global warming goals.

The tree planting effort will:

• Benefit the local economy (all trees planted is purchased locally). Villagers have come to realise that the trees and the blue-eyed black lemur have value. This mans a reduction in deforestation and hunting of the lemur for bush meat.
• Extract tons of CO2 from the atmosphere. While this is not a carbon offsetting project, the benefit of planting 100000s of trees in the tropics are well documented. Any tree left standing or planted has a positive long-term benefit in our fight to remove excess CO2 from the atmosphere.

2) We have also stayed true to our roots – to educate about global warming, climate change and sustainability.

In 2009, Carbon-info.org published a children’s e-book children’s book “Global warming for young minds”. 

The book is aimed at educating the next generation – boys and girls aged 6-10 years old – about what global warming is, what causes it and how everyone can help avoid the major problems that comes with global warming and climate change.

The book will be published by the AEG Publishing Group, and will be available from Amazon and other major online retailers in the early part of 2010.

“Global warming for young minds” will make it easier for parents to educate their children about these big and important issue in a fun and factual way, without scaring the child or confusing the young mind with “science” and difficult to understand concepts.

 Source: www.carbon-info.org

France’s Carbon Tax Hitch; Brazil’s Emissions Law Goes Ahead

French ministers scrambled before year end to rescue a carbon tax aimed at cutting energy consumption, which was annulled by the Constitutional Court as there were too many loopholes benefiting major industrial polluters, while Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva on signed into law a national policy to reduce emissions by between 36.1% and 38.9% by 2020.

Crispian Balmer for Reuters World Environment News (31 December 2009):

PARIS – French ministers scrambled on Wednesday to rescue a carbon tax aimed at cutting energy consumption, which was annulled by the Constitutional Court just 48 hours before it was due to come into force.

France’s highest court stunned President Nicolas Sarkozy’s government late on Tuesday by ruling against the tax, saying there were too many loopholes benefiting major industrial polluters.

The new tax was expected to raise 1.5 billion euros ($2.15 billion) next year and the court’s decision will put added pressure on the budget deficit, already forecast to come in at a high 8.5 percent of gross domestic product in 2010.

Ministers promised to present a revised text on January 20 but it could take weeks more to get the law back through parliament and badly needed cash flowing into state coffers.

“The government is going to persevere. It is a tough fight, but a worthwhile one,” government spokesman Luc Chatel told LCI television. “France has to remain in the forefront of the battle to protect the environment,” he added.

The carbon tax was promoted by Sarkozy as a cornerstone of his fiscal and environmental policy. It was set to come into effect on January 1, by imposing a levy on oil, gas and coal use amounting to 17 euros per ton of carbon dioxide emissions.

However, many of France’s biggest industrial polluters, as well as truckers, farmers and fishing fleets, were offered generous discounts, or exempted altogether.

The government argued that many of these sectors already faced European Union curbs and should not be placed at a disadvantage to their international competitors.

The Constitutional Court objected that 93 percent of industrial carbon dioxide emissions would be exempt, saying the measure would do nothing to combat global warming and went against the spirit of fostering equality amongst tax payers.

The opposition Socialist party had long complained that the tax would unfairly penalize low earners and crowed victory.

“This is a good decision and shows once again that Sarkozy’s way of doing things does not work,” Socialist parliamentary party leader Jean-Marc Ayrault told France Info radio.

“They announce a reform, listen to no one and produce a poor job. It’s a real mess … now they will have to start from scratch and oversee a fiscal reform that is more ecological and does more to protect the environment.”

The junior minister for trade and consumption, Herve Novelli, said the revised tax would offer fewer loopholes.

“It was perhaps shocking that the sectors given exemptions were those that polluted the most … We will therefore need to remedy that,” he told Europe 1 radio.

Source: www.planetark.org

Source: www.hispanicbusiness.com

Sustainability Awards & New Green Building Standards

The Common Carbon Metric for measuring energy use and reporting greenhouse gas emissions from building operations was officially launched at COP15 in Copenhagen, while Stockland has been named Sustainable Company of the Year at the 9th Australian Sustainability Awards for Australian Securities Exchange-listed companies.

Stockland cleans up sustainable company of the year award

Stockland has been named Sustainable Company of the Year at the 9^th Australian Sustainability Awards at a luncheon in Melbourne.

The Awards, hosted annually by Ethical Investor magazine, recognise outstanding achievement by Australian Securities Exchange-listed companies in a range of areas of corporate sustainability.

Stockland received the award for its ongoing commitment to sustainability, balancing environmental, social and economic outcomes.

Stockland Managing Director Matthew Quinn said the company was delighted to have been recognised by Ethical Investor for its commitment to operate ethically, responsibly and in a sustainable way.

“We have achieved a great deal this year by creating a more robust sustainability strategy for our Residential and Retirement Living businesses, as well as continuing to focus on improving the sustainability performance of our assets,” said Mr Quinn.

Stockland was also recognised for its commitment to creating sustainable and vibrant communities through stakeholder engagement, community development and community involvement.

“At Stockland, we aim to create sustainable and vibrant communities by engaging with the local community and other key stakeholders,” Mr Quinn said.

This approach has been formalised over the past year with the development of a Stakeholder Engagement Framework and clear stakeholder engagement plan templates for all of its projects.

“We are currently refining our community development plans and aim to introduce world-class initiatives on social sustainability.

“Our community investment program has been developed by our people and allows us to make a positive impact in the communities in which we operate,” said Mr Quinn.

Stockland contributed $3.4 million in community investment in FY09, with more than 44 percent of employees volunteering time to mentor students and support local communities.

Stockland environmental highlights from the past year include:

• Achieved ‘Gold’ membership of the Dow Jones Sustainability Index World in early 2009. The Index represents the top 10 percent of the leading companies globally, with four property companies awarded ‘Gold’ status. Stockland is also included in the FTESE4Good Index which recognises organisations that apply and demonstrate outcomes against environmental, social and governance principles.

• Listed in the Australian Climate Leadership Index in 2009 which rates companies with advanced strategies on climate change.

• Two projects, Stockhome and 2 Victoria Avenue, Perth, attained their final Green Star accreditation with both achieving 6 Stars (‘World Leadership’).

Source: www.stockland.com.au

The Green Building Council of Australia passes on some important news to come out of Copenhagen:

 The Common Carbon Metric for measuring energy use and reporting greenhouse gas emissions from building operations was officially launched at COP15 in Copenhagen on 11 December 2009. The event was hosted in the EU Pavillion by the Ministry of the Environment of Finland and the Marrakech Task Force on Sustainable Buildings and Construction and organized in cooperation with UNEP-SBCI, UNEP FI and ADEME. It was well attended by representatives from delegations and observer organizations, including several senior level representatives.

… “No government – let it be in an industrialized or in a developing country – can leave buildings out of its policy toolbox if it wants to save energy and reach serious greenhouse gas emission reduction targets”, stated the Minister of Housing of Finland, Mr. Jan Vapaavuori, who opened the meeting. UNEP DTIE’s Director, Sylvie Lemmet, then presented the new UNEP SBCI report “Buildings and Climate Change – Summary for Decision Makers” highlighting the opportunities for drastic emission reductions in the building sector and outlining a step-by-step approach to harnessing these opportunities. She also called upon the negotiators at COP15 to make the building sector count in the outcome of negotiations, and to put in place an agreement that will support emission reduction in the building sector at international, national and local levels.

Professor Diana Urge-Vorsatz, lead author for the buildings chapter in the 4th IPCC report, presented new research showing that the emission reduction potential in buildings is in fact much higher than was presented in the IPCC report. Every new building we build and every building we renovate have the promise to make or break a low carbon footprint for decades to come – this is an opportunity we simply cannot afford to lose, she said. Mr. Hewson Baltzell, of UNEP’s Finance Initiative presented the overwhelmingly positive business case for emission reductions from buildings, using the landmark building Empire State Building in new York as an example.

The chairman for SBCI’s think tank on climate change, Mr. Stéphane Pouffary of ADEME, introduced the Common Carbon Metric, highlighting the importance of now finally having one common tool – a common language – in place to provide an internationally coherent and consistent method for measuring the climate footprint of buildings. A big thank you was given to all the many organizations and experts who have contributed to establishing this metric. Finally, Ms. Priyanka Kochhar from TERI in New Delhi presented the situation in India, confirming that the opportunity for emission reduction in buildings is also recognized and pursued in Indian policy making.

The participants to the event had several questions and comments, which were welcoming the Common Carbon Metrics as an important step forward. The event was followed by a press conference at the main media center in COP15.

The event is the fifth time UNEP-SBCI and partners formally organize side events as part of the UNFCCC negotiation process. In COP15, as in previous meetings, the side event is complemented with bilateral discussions and informal information meetings with delegations.

Source: www.gbca.org.au