Monitoring Policy Making at the United Nations |
| ||||||||||||
Climate Change
Picture Credit: BBC
Scientists agree that human activity causes a rise in both average world temperatures and the occurrence of extreme weather events. Since the beginning of the industrial revolution, rich countries have emitted the overwhelming share of the greenhouse gases causing the earth’s atmosphere to warm. Yet the world’s poor are first and hardest hit by the consequences of climate change. Many countries have already experienced deadly droughts and floods. And climate-induced natural disasters have displaced hundreds of thousands of people across the world, while global fresh water resources become increasingly scarce.
Although both renewable energy alternatives and energy efficiency technologies are widely available, governments hesitate to take serious and immediate action, and continue allowing wasteful use of fossil fuels in energy consumption. Under the Kyoto protocol, countries have committed to specific emissions reduction targets by 2012. But reductions under the present protocol are far too small and the world’s largest emitter, the US, remains outside the agreement. A globally coordinated response with the participation of both the US and the large fast-growing economies of China and India is necessary to prevent a disaster that will significantly reduce human well-being and could cause massive species extinction and a collapse of the global ecosystem. At the UN Climate Change Conference in Nairobi in 2006, governments agreed to begin negotiations on a successor to the Kyoto protocol in 2008.
Also See GPF's Pages on:
The Environment
2008 | 2007 | Archived Articles
Human Development Report 2007/2008 (November 2007)
The 2007-2008 Human Development Report published by UNDP addresses the problems of global warming. The report warns that the world has only 10 years to change its course in order to be able to reverse the process of global warming. Its authors argue that the financial resources and technological capabilities to do so already exist, but countries lack the willingness to make the necessary changes.
Tad Patzek, a Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the University of California Berkeley and expert on biofuels, points out that long-term biofuel production is not sustainable, in this paper presented to the OECD. He concludes that after just a few years of biofuel production, the Earth will become denuded and “hostile to human life.” Patzek recommends using the planet’s resources in a severely limited way, decreasing the global amount of “cars, trucks and livestock” and limiting population growth. He strongly supports the use of hybrid and electric cars recharged with solar energy, arguing that this technology is 100 times more efficient than biofuel technology.
Concluding that immediate government action can curb greenhouse gas emissions without “substantial” economic costs, the third volume of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report outlines specific strategies to mitigate global warming. The IPCC discusses the scientific, economic, political and social aspects of both short and long term policies, focusing on affordable solutions which are compatible with international sustainable development.
The second volume of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report presents specific impacts of global warming on each continent. In addition to widespread food and water shortages, the report warns of “increased deaths, disease and injury” due to “climate change-related exposures” such as heat waves, floods, and droughts. The IPCC further states that countries must begin to adapt to the “already unavoidable” consequences of global warming, especially in the most vulnerable continents – such as Africa – where “climate change could impede nations’ abilities to achieve sustainable development.”
113 countries, including the United States, have ratified this United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report which announces that human activities are “very likely” the principle cause of global warming. The report, compiled by 2,500 scientists over a period of six years, predicts global rises in temperatures and sea levels over the next 1,000 years, causing an increased likelihood of droughts, heat waves, and other dangerous climate changes if human influence remains constant.
This Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) brief analyses how bio- or agrofuel production infringes on The Right to Food. This human right obligates all signatories to implement a “twin-track approach to food security.” Firstly, states must enable every person to feed him-or herself with dignity. Secondly, states must provide safety nets in cases where no other remedy against hunger exists. According to the FAO, countries set well-intended targets for agrofuel production but neglect the negative impact of these targets on food security.
Global Policy Forum and International Catholic Organizations Information Center organized a two-part event on global warming. After a screening of Al Gore’s film, “An Inconvenient Truth,” three panelists – Michael Renner from Worldwatch Institute, Mohammad Reza Salamat from DESA, United Nations and James Tripp, General Counsel at Environmental Defense – discussed global climate change and steps to address it.2008
G8 Fails to Set Climate World Alright (July 8, 2008)
G8 leaders agreed to cut carbon emissions by 50% by 2050 at their July 2008 meeting in Japan. But, over 200 countries already agreed to this target when they signed the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change at the Earth Summit in 1992. The BBC says, G8 leaders should take concrete steps to reduce emissions rather than restate targets and quarrel over setting a baseline year to calculate emissions. G8 countries are responsible for 62% of global carbon emissions but its leaders are “crawling forward on emissions cuts at a time when giant leaps and bounds are needed.”Living on the Ice Shelf (June 26, 2008)
Scientists argue that calculations by the Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that sets base-year limits for international efforts to reduce climate change are inaccurate. The IPCC advocates a market-driven approach to a post-carbon world economy fueled by investments in new sustainable energy. However, large energy companies are not fulfilling their commitments to invest in alternate energy technologies due to the lack of profits in this area. The author says that richer countries must make firm commitments to reduce their carbon emissions. (TomDispatch)Another Inconvenient Truth (June 25, 2008)
Supporters of biofuels claim that the fuels allow poorer countries to cut carbon emissions and reduce their dependence on imported oil. But Oxfam says that biofuel production is not solving, but worsening the climate and energy crises. Biofuel production is also responsible for 30 percent of the increase in global food prices that has dragged 30 million people into poverty. Oxfam calls upon rich countries to dismantle subsidies for biofuels. Environmental Change Re-Draws Atlas of Africa (June 10, 2008)
The UN Environment Programme outlines the negative impact of climate change in Africa. The continent is only responsible for four percent of global carbon emissions but, its people are amongst the most vulnerable. Countries like Kenya and Liberia are implementing stricter policies against exploitation of forests. However, forced migration resulting from conflict, water scarcity and food insecurity are also putting increasing pressure on the environment. The report urges richer countries to commit to reduce their carbon emissions.Paradise Lost: Climate Change Forces South Sea Islanders to Seek Sanctuary Abroad (June 6, 2008)
The fate of the small island nation of Kiribati is in serious jeopardy. Climate change is destroying crops, causing floods, and polluting water, making the island inhabitable. But few countries have agreed to accept Kiribati refugees. Kiribati President Anote Tong urges other national leaders to look beyond short-term economic development and take action to counter climate change. For Kiribati “it’s not an issue of economic growth, it’s an issue of human survival.” (Independent)Why We Face Both Food and Water Crises (May 15, 2008)
In this interview, physicist Vandana Shiva explains that the global economic structure is incompatible with the basic physics of the planet. Unsustainable, large-scale agriculture not only “displaces small peasants, creates poverty and bad food,” but also emits a huge quantity of carbon into the atmosphere, causing climate instability. Perversely, large agribusinesses with a stranglehold of the world economy, such as Cargill and Monsanto, harvest super-profits while people starve. (AlterNet)The Right to Food and the Impact of Liquid Biofuels (May 2008)
This study by the Food and Agriculture Organization examines the impact of liquid biofuel production on the human right to food. The report concludes that biofuel production has impeded on the right to food by significantly contributing to higher food prices, by evicting vulnerable groups from their land in favor of concentrated ownership and plantation-style production, by reducing biodiversity and by increasing competition for water.Why Bother? (April 20, 2008)
The bestselling author and journalist Michael Pollan points out that climate change is inherently a problem of human lifestyle and mindset. The array of services and luxuries that cheap energy has made widely available not only contribute to global warming, but also create a dependency and passivity in the public. The author argues that individuals must take action before lawmakers will do so. Small adjustments, like using more efficient light bulbs, or radical changes like growing a portion of our own food, can snowball into a collective change in lifestyles, and consequently a change in policy, legislation and technology. (New York Times)Sinking Without Trace: Australia’s Climate Change Victims (May 5, 2008)
Serious floods caused by climate change are threatening the existence of the Island of Murray and several other islands in the Torres Strait. The Torres islands constitute the most vulnerable area of Australia, but the government has not included the region in its action plan to challenge global warming. Some islanders are asking for relocation but others are determined to stay despite the uncertainty of their future. They fear that moving away may endanger their local culture. (Independent)Artificial Foods and Corporate Crops: Can We Escape the “Frankenstate”? (May 2, 2008)
This article criticizes the effect of industrial agriculture on global food security. The author points out that a few large corporations have patented or genetically modified most of the plants humans rely on for their basic needs. These corporations use chemical and genetic technologies to “dominate agricultural production from seed to stomach and to profit from every bite.” In addition, industrial food production exhausts Earth’s basic biological support systems, and makes the planet more vulnerable to climate change. (AlterNet)Time for an International Renewable Energy Agency? (April 23, 2008)
In April 2008, representatives from more than 60 countries met in Berlin to discuss the establishment of the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA). IRENA aims to promote the “socially desirable” options of renewable energy and to take a stand against conventional energy sources like fossil fuels and their powerful lobbyists. IRENA differs from the existing International Energy Agency (IEA) by aiming to adapt energy markets to decentralized, renewable energy sources rather than focus on central, large-scale energy supply. (Renewable Energy World)Our Global Warming Rage Lets Global Hunger Grow (April 14, 2008)
This article accuses world leaders of being “asleep at the wheel.” While policymakers subsidized biofuels in an effort to counter global warming, enormous food price increases and a consequential food crisis swept in under their “radar screens.” Millions of people cannot afford essential foodstuffs, especially in countries such as Eritrea and Sierra Leone, where 85 to 88 percent of income, goes to food. (Truthout)Can Capitalism Survive Climate Change? (April 1, 2008)
This Foreign Policy In Focus article argues that consumption and capital accumulation contradict global efforts to curb climate change. World leaders talk about shifting away from fossil fuels but they avoid discussing how to change the global economic system that is driven by over-consumption. The author proposes a strategy based on the principle of “common but differentiated responsibility.” Richer governments should recognize poorer nations’ rights to develop and counties like China should cooperate with global efforts to reduce global warming.Bangkok Climate Talks Progressing Smoothly So Far (April 1, 2008)
This article reports on the start of the UN Climate Change talks in Bangkok, from March 31 – April 4, 2008. These talks, together with a series of subsequent meetings, should lead to a new climate change agreement in 2009, to succeed the Kyoto Protocol that expires in 2012. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change chief Yvo de Boer finds the goodwill shown during the Bangkok conference encouraging: “I take it that countries really want to get down to work rather than fight procedural wars.” (Integrated Regional Information Framework)The Clean Energy Scam (March 27, 2008)
This article argues that biofuels do not counter global warming, but actually worsen the process. Brazil’s agriculture industry, in search of arable land to accommodate biofuel production, is rapidly encroaching on the Amazon. However, cutting down forests - the world’s natural carbon storehouses - releases huge amounts of carbon into the biosphere. Sadly, with many governments subsidizing biofuel production, deforestation will continue unabated, leading to higher food prices, and more carbon emission. (Time)UN Security Council Must Act Preemptively on Climate Change (March 24, 2008)
The authors of this article commend UN initiatives on tackling climate change, but claim the organization is not doing enough. The authors urge the Security Council to take “preemptive action” on climate change. But placing climate change in the hands of the Security Council could actually hinder progress. The largest carbon emitters (China and the US) are also P-5 members and could veto any resolution suggesting a carbon cap, for instance. (Christian Science Monitor)Climate Change Deepening World Water Crisis (March 19, 2008)
This article reports on the growing water crisis. One billion people worldwide do not have access to safe drinking water and 2.5 billion are lacking safe sanitation. Experts say the crisis is not due to an outright lack of water, but rather a “chronic lack of funding and inadequate understanding of the need for sanitation and good hygiene at the local level.” Climate change will only worsen the problem. In addition, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon warns that water shortages will drive future conflicts (Inter Press Service)Priced Out of the Market (March 3, 2008)
This New York Times editorial discusses the human cost of the “rich world’s subsidized appetite for biofuels.” When it seemed that global food supply might run out in the past, food production grew to meet demand. This time it might not be so easy, with the demand for biofuels diverting food into energy for cars, rather than human beings.Norway's 'Doomsday Vault' Holding Seeds of Survival in Case of Disaster Is Buried in Arctic(February 25, 2008)
This article reports on the opening of the Svalbard Global Seed Vault. The Arctic vault will serve as a back up for existing seed banks and contains over 10 million specimens from “virtually every country” in the world. The Global Crop Diversity Trust, which oversaw the creation of the vault, states that it will preserve biodiversity in the face of climate change, war and natural disasters. (Daily Mail)Wild Green Yonder? A 747 Fuelled Partly By Coconuts (February 24, 2008)
By converting food crops into biofuels, producers contribute to deforestation and drive up food prices. Environmentalists generally oppose biofuels and some policy makers attempt to at least limit and monitor biofuel production. But the private sector seems to throw all caution to the wind in their search for alternative sources of fuel. Richard Branson, president of Virgin Atlantic proudly presented the first biofuel flight by a 747 jumbo jet from London to Amsterdam. (Globe and Mail)Faults in the Vault: Not Everyone is Celebrating Svalbard (February 2008)
According to GRAIN, the Global Seed Vault is not the “ultimate safety net” for biodiversity. Instead, it is part of a wider strategy making “off site storage” the single approach to preserving biodiversity. The Vault takes plant varieties away from their farmers and communities of origin and subsequently denies them access to the stored seeds. The Standard Depositor Agreement for the Vault gives right of use to a select few. GRAIN argues that farmers should control biodiversity – not the corporations that have destroyed it.Losing Ground: The Human Rights Impacts of Oil Palm Plantation Expansion in Indonesia (February 2008)
With this report, Friends of the Earth, LifeMosaic and Sawit Watch add to the discussion on biofuels by pointing out the negative human rights implications of the expanding industry. Indonesia, the world’s largest producer of crude palm oil, is developing a plantation the size of “England, The Netherlands and Switzerland combined.” The 60-90 million Indonesians who depend on forests for their livelihoods are literally “losing ground.”Biofuels a Lose-Lose Strategy, Critics Say (January 26, 2008)
Biofuel production by the US -amongst other countries- is driving up food prices worldwide. The Earth Policy Institute expects that the US will turn 114 million tonnes of grain into fuel in 2008. Critics are calling biofuels a ‘lose-lose strategy’. On top of driving up food prices and thus exacerbating world hunger, the production of ethanol degrades the soil and requires the use of large amounts of fuel, fertilizer, pesticides and water. (Inter Press Service)Europe, Cutting Biofuel Subsidies, Redirects Aid to Stress Greenest Options (January 22, 2008)
After the 2007 biofuels craze, European governments are rethinking their generous blanket subsidies for biofuels. Biofuels are not carbon-neutral, as the processing and fertilizing of crops for biofuels also produce carbon dioxide. An EU energy policy directive restricts imports of biofuels that place additional strain on the environment. (New York Times)Plan B - How to Stop Global Warming (January 4, 2008)
In his book – Plan B 3.0 – the President of the Earth Policy Institute Lester Brown outlines “an all-out response proportionate to the threat that global warming presents to our future.” One element of Brown’s plan involves a “worldwide carbon tax,” modeled after cigarette taxes. This article points out that Brown’s proposals make use of existing technologies, suggesting that the “real battle over climate change is now political, not technological.” (Time)2007
Disappointment in Bali (December 17, 2007)
This editorial from the International Herald Tribune expresses disappointment in the lack of definite outcomes from the UN climate conference in Bali. The US delegation was unwilling to commit to any promises of carbon reductions and severely slowed down the negotiations. This might serve as a disincentive for other large emitters, such as China, to actively change their energy policies and effectively reduce climate change.Climate Change, Global Ethics and the Market (December 9, 2007)
Climate change is a global problem that requires global solutions. Suggestions for solutions include global markets for greenhouse gas emissions rights or global emissions taxes. However, the author argues that in order to implement these, the world needs a new, global institution. He puts forward the idea of a global climate fund that will “manage” the atmosphere and the environment “on behalf of future generations.” The fund will invest its revenues in worldwide environmental projects. (Post-Autistic Economics Review)Carbon Tax Should Replace Carbon Trading to Curb Climate Change, Says US Mayor Bloomberg (December 13, 2007)
At the UN climate conference in Bali, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg strongly advocated for carbon taxes rather than cap-and-trade schemes as a means to reduce carbon emissions. Bloomberg said carbon trading is “vulnerable to special interests, corruption, inefficiencies.” A carbon tax would more directly and efficiently reduce carbon emissions that cause global warming, as well as provide the world’s governments with funds to further improve the environment. (Associated Press)How Rising Heat Traps Millions in Poverty (December 5, 2007)
The UNDP Human Development Report 2007-2008 warns that increased global warming may reverse the progress made on poverty reduction in African countries. Global warming, if not reduced, may cause hundreds of millions of people to experience malnutrition, water scarcity and the breaking down of agricultural systems. The authors of the report urge rich countries to “demonstrate leadership” in cutting carbon emissions. (allAfrica)Climate Contradictions: World Bank Sets Up Shop in Bali (December 4, 2007)
The World Bank seeks to play a key role in the UN climate conference in Bali. The Bank prides itself on being a “clearing house on carbon trading” and on being committed to reducing carbon emissions through specialized energy lending programs. Critics protest the Bank’s involvement given the World Bank and IMF’s subsidies to the oil industry and their lack of investment in renewable energy production. (Bretton Woods Project)Ditch Green Industries, Invest in Guns – a Deadly Market Gospel (December 3, 2007)
The US administration claims that market forces of supply and demand will solve the problems associated with climate change. However, 2007 has seen a decrease in investment in green industries, with a larger share of money going to private security and defense companies that claim to provide protection from problems caused by global warming. Naomi Klein argues that the US prefers building fortresses to keep the problems out rather than regulating economic activity to reach a real solution. (AlterNet)War Has Historic Links to Global Climate Change (November 19, 2007)
Scientists at Georgia Institute of Technology have found that there is a clear link between changes in world temperatures and warfare. Both increases and decreases in temperature may cause a fall in food crop production and a subsequent rise in food price, and consequently conflict for access to resources. Future global warming is particularly worrying to the scientists. (New Scientist)The Politics of Ethanol Outshine Its Costs (November 15, 2007)
This article from the Christian Science Monitor describes how US politicians across the political spectrum promote ethanol production as a means to reduce US dependency on foreign oil. This is happening despite warnings from environmentalists and subsidy opponents that the production of ethanol is expensive and harms the environment. Further, it drives up the prices of food grains worldwide.Why China Could Blame Its CO2 on West (November 12, 2007)
In preparation for the 2007 Bali follow-up to the Kyoto protocol, environmentalists and policy makers are coming up with new ideas for reducing carbon emissions. They claim that responsibility for carbon emissions should lie with the final consumers of manufactured goods. One of the problems associated with the Kyoto agreement is carbon leakage – to reduce their own emissions, rich countries outsource dirty industries to poor countries. If consumers pay for the damage caused by manufacturing their products, industries can more effectively reduce their emissions, they argue. (Wall Street Journal)Environmental Failures 'Put Humanity at Risk' (October 26, 2007)
A study by the United Nations Environment Programme claims that governments are responding too slowly and insufficiently to climate change, putting “humanity at risk.” With each person in the world requiring a third more land than what the planet can supply, the world lacks the resources its population needs. The report says that rich countries must reduce their emissions by as much as 80 percent by 2050 to cut greenhouse gas emissions to half of the 1990 levels. (Guardian)The Making of a Climate Movement (October 22, 2007)
A large number of environmental activists have founded the coalition 1 Sky to influence environmental policy in Washington. The group says that climate change is the most important issue of our generation. The group hosts a series of demonstrations to convince US politicians to cut carbon emissions by 80 percent by 2020, to ban coal-fired power plants and to create 5 million “green collar jobs”. 1 Sky representatives say that government bills “must match what science says,” and that Washington must stop applauding itself for its limited actions to stop climate change. (The Nation)Biofuels – Great Green Hope or Swindle (October 20, 2007)
This Inter Press Service article highlights many of the problems associated with biofuels. Some researchers argue that biofuel production is a step in the wrong direction as it hardly reduces carbon emissions. Producing biofuels also drives up food prices and increases conflict over food resources. Governments both in the US and Europe are increasing subsidies for biofuel production, however, and critics are concerned about this trend as governments seldom phase out subsidies.Gale Warning, Global Burden Sharing (October 19, 2007)
For the first time, the world faces a “battle over income distribution,” writes the author of this YaleGlobal article. Climate change - through droughts, floods and temperature changes - will shift agricultural production to new areas and threaten many people’s access to food. Through current carbon emissions trading systems, rich countries and powerful industries are able to place the burden of reducing emissions on poor countries, effectively hindering their industrial development. The author predicts that over the next decade, countries will fight over resources and over how to share responsibility for global warming.The Environmental Movement in the Global South: The Pivotal Agent in the Fight against Global Warming (October 12, 2007)
This article from Focus on the Global South challenges the myth that developing countries lack concern for the environment and simply wish to grow economically in the same fashion as rich countries. National elites in poor countries may argue that their countries have yet to fill their “pollution quota” as have the rich countries, and therefore they should proceed with rapid industrialization. But, citizen campaigns against large dams in India and deforestation in Thailand and the Philippines are examples of local communities trying to overcome pressures for industrialization and advocating for a healthier environment.Global-Warming Skeptics: Is it Only the News Media Who Need to Chill? (October 11, 2007)
Some climate change skeptics claim that the concerns about global warming are the result of media hype. Skeptics say the catch-cry of global warming is similar to the fears of “global cooling” in the 1970s. This article from the Christian Science Monitor argues that this is an unfair comparison. Those who doubt that climate change is taking place are simply resurrecting the climate cooling arguments in order to find a reason to oppose the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s warnings. While fears of climate cooling was a short-lived theory that never sat well in the scientific community, global warming is backed by sound data.A Sea Change: The Wind Farm Revolution (October 11, 2007)
This Independent article explains how Britain can easily become the largest producer of offshore wind power. Although there has been strong public opposition to on-shore wind turbines, the public and the government give a thumbs up to offshore wind farms. Still, producers face a long time lag on their wind-energy investments due to time-consuming bureaucratic procedures. Installing a wind farm can take up to 10 years to complete, significantly obstructing the production of renewable energy sources.Empowering Women to Combat Climate Change (September 28, 2007)
This article explains how gender inequality grows when disasters occur. Climate change will have particularly strong effects in poor areas of the world, and the majority of the poor are usually women. A range of women’s organizations suggest that if women were better informed of possible changes in weather patterns and forthcoming disasters, local communities would stand a larger chance of survival. They also argue that as women possess significant “generational knowledge” on local agriculture and safety, it would be extremely beneficial to include women in community decision making. (MediaGlobal)Many Biofuels Have More Climate Impact Than Oil (September 28, 2007)
A new study by Nobel winning chemist Paul J. Crutzen sheds light on the many disadvantages of biofuel production. The production of many biofuels release more greenhouse gases than what is saved using them, due to intensive industrial farming methods. The fertilizer often used in production of biofuels, such as rapeseed, carries a high concentration of nitrous oxide which cancels out the benefits of reduced carbon emissions. Producing biofuels also results in other side effects, such as increased food prices and rainforest degradation. The report concludes that biofuel produced from rapeseed would release between 1 and 1.7 times more greenhouse gases than regular diesel. (Reuters)All Nations Have a Responsibility to Strive for Lifestyles That Are Sustainable (September 26, 2007)
In this YaleGlobal article, the former Indian Ambassador to the UN, Chandrashekhar Dasgupta, argues that developing countries should be allowed to continue their industrial development and catch up with the developed countries, and that rich countries should bear the bulk of the costs related to climate change mitigation. While the rich countries have the financial and technological resources to make changes to lower carbon emissions, these are not available to poor countries. He argues that the poor countries too should contribute to prevent climate change, but fails to specify in what way they will be doing this.All Countries Need to Take Major Steps on Climate Change: Global Poll (September 24, 2007)
This poll carried out for the BBC sparks great optimism on action to mitigate climate change. Carried out in 21 rich and poor countries, the poll shows that a large majority of the public in these countries believe that human activities create climate change and that major steps should be taken to prevent it. The majority believes that developing countries should reduce their carbon emission in return for financial assistance and technological support from richer countries. Only three countries support the argument that since emission per person is low in poor countries, they should not be required to reduce carbon release. In China, the largest contributor to carbon emissions, 70 percent of the urban population believe that great steps should be taken to reduce the climate change gases.GE’s Environment Push Hits Business Realities (September 14, 2007)
In 2005, Jeffrey Immelt, CEO of General Electric, announced he would make his company more environmentally friendly and launched the “ecomagination” campaign. The campaign involves investing in “innovative solutions to environmental challenges” and in selling a range of self-proclaimed environmentally friendly products. As part of the new business strategy, Immelt also campaigned for the US government to limit carbon dioxide emissions. However, customers, employees and shareholders have opposed this shift to an environmentally friendly profile, and General Electric is still mainly dependent on the sale of oil and gas products and coal powered steam turbines. (Wall Street Journal)Cut Fuel Use and the Trade Deficit (September 14, 2007)
To lower its trade deficit, the US should cut the consumption and import of fossil fuels, argues the author of this National Journal article. Methods to cut fuel consumption in the US are readily available and by using them, the US could lower its energy demand by 0.3 percent every year. The author argues that the US must focus on lowering the demand for energy rather than simply switching to cleaner energy technology. The US could achieve this by raising energy prices (taxes) to European levels.As We Stand on the Brink of Catastrophe, Bio-Fuels Are No Magic Bullet (September 12, 2007)
The authors of this AlterNet article warn against depicting the switch from non-renewable energy sources to bio-fuels as a magic bullet in decreasing climate change. A solution must not only include better energy technologies, but reduced consumption and energy use. The most popular bio-fuel, ethanol, actually costs more energy to produce than it provides, resulting in a large net increase in emissions of greenhouse gasses. The production of bio-fuels also affects fragile ecosystems and lowers biodiversity.Climate Change Refugees (September 4, 2007)
Billions of people across the world might become refugees as a result of climate change. Inhabitants of Pacific islands such as Tuvalu are already preparing to move to New Zealand, while millions of people in Bangladesh are fleeing from either flooding or drought. The author argues that the world’s governments and international institutions such as the UN are doing little to mitigate the climate change risks and to accommodate potential refugee populations. He also suggests that treaties protecting political refugees should include those who flee from a “deadly climate.” (In These Times)The False Promise of Biofuels (September 2007)
This report argues that biofuels are not the “magic elixir” in the quest for renewable energy sources. Rather, the author points to serious consequences of biofuel production, frequently overlooked as policymakers eagerly jump on the bandwagon. The report calls for moving from a focus on production, to a focus on consumption. There are no alternative energy sources to satisfy the rich world’s high per capita energy consumption, so we will have to consume less. “The big question is whether this will be forced on us by economic chaos from depletion of our non-renewable resources, or by our adapting to this inevitability in a thoughtful and organized manner.” (International Forum on Globalization)Global Food Crisis Looms as Climate Change and Population Growth Strip Fertile Land (August 31, 2007)
Scientists predict that rapid climate change together with a growing world population will cause a global food crisis. Such a crisis, worsened by poor farming and deforestation, may cause conflicts over scarce resources. According to the UN, land degradation is one of the biggest environmental challenges, destabilizing societies, lowering food security and increasing poverty. Countries producing biofuels in response to energy security fears, adds to the food crisis as crops for biofuel replace food crops. (Guardian)
Energy Efficiency Easiest Path to Aid Climate (August 28, 2007)
A UN report on Climate Change argues that in the future the easiest way to reduce climate change will be through improving “energy efficiency for power plants, cars or homes.” Such an approach can help governments plan a strategy against global warming beyond the Kyoto Protocol, states Yvo de Boer, a UN Climate Change official. The study also predicts a move to renewable energies such as solar and hydropower. But critics say that the report lacks a purpose and that governments need to reduce emissions below current levels by 2030. (Reuters)UN Special Rapporteur: Impact of Biofuels on the Right to Food (August 22, 2007)
In this report to the General Assembly, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, Jean Ziegler evaluates the impact of biofuels on the Right to Food. Ziegler labels the “sudden, ill-conceived, rush to convert food into fuel” a “recipe for disaster.” The Rapporteur calls for a five-year moratorium on biofuel production to review production technology and to create “regulatory structures to protect against negative environmental, social and human rights impacts” of biofuel production. To eradicate competition between food and fuel, Ziegler urges member states to look into the possibility of deriving biofuels solely from agricultural waste and non-food crops. Food prices would then remain stable, and both producers and consumers could benefit from biofuels.Wolfowitz Tried to Censor World Bank on Climate Change (August 14, 2007)
According to documents recently made available to the public, the Bush administration repeatedly curtailed efforts by the World Bank to address the issue of global warming. The article argues that Paul Wolfowitz, the former President of the World Bank, got personally involved and removed the words "climate change" from a bank progress report and ordered the text to “shift the focus away from global warming.” (Independent)At World Bank, Climate Change Isn't Part of the Equation (August 12, 2007)
This Los Angeles Times article discusses how the World Bank disregards environmental matters such as climate change, due to the influence of its biggest supporter, the United States. Kristalina Georgieva, the World Bank's strategy and operations director for sustainable development, has stated that the issue of climate change is politically very contentious and said that it will take at least two years before the World Bank includes carbon emissions in its decision-making process.Extreme Weather: A Global Problem (August 7, 2007)
According to the United Nations weather agency extreme weather conditions such as tremendous heat in some areas and atypical snow or heavy rainfall in others have characterized 2007. Most researchers believe extreme weather events will become more common as “heat-trapping carbon dioxide emissions cause global temperatures to rise.” The World Meteorological Organization wants to set up an “early warning system” for severe weather conditions and improve monitoring climate change’s impact in poorer countries such as India, where such extreme weather could destroy farmland, affecting agriculture and the lives of millions. (Associated Press)Climate Change Forcing Indian Farmers to Commit Suicide (July 30, 2007)
An investigation carried out by ActionAid found that climate change and the deterioration of social and economic conditions in some densely populated Indian regions have made hunger worse amongst the poor and pushed people to commit suicide. The study focuses on significant changes in the weather conditions during the last four to five years which have adversely affected farming. This OneWorld article argues that, compared to 30 years ago, rainfall has now decreased immensely, and that the government has failed to respond adequately as “it has not created safeguards to protect farmers” and guarantee food security.Tiny Tuvalu Fights for Its Literal Survival (July 27, 2007)
In danger of disappearing within 50 years due to climate change and rising sea levels, Tuvalu, one of the smallest nations in the world, seeks to turn itself into an “environmentally respectful nation” and set an example for other countries. The sea level has been increasing at twice the average global rate calculated by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Tuvalu’s sustainable development projects include “new solar streetlights, composting toilets, wind projects, a biodiesel plan using coconut palm, and horticultural training to help reduce dependence on imported foods.” (Inter Press Service)Climate Change and Human Rights (2007)
This report explores the connection between human rights and climate change arguing that climate change is not “just an ecological issue” but an issue of “intergenerational equality”. Global warming for example will make the sea level rise and alter weather patterns, “affecting the relations between present and future generations.” The report also analyzes how climate change will worsen people’s living conditions, putting their basic human rights in jeopardy. (World Economy and Development)Agrofuels: Towards a Reality Check in Nine Key Areas (July 2, 2007)
This report on the impact of agrofuels argues that the rush for ‘biofuels’ is already causing serious damage. Far from being sustainable, agrofuels have not shown to alleviate global warming; they actually threaten to accelerate it by destroying rainforests and other ecosystems to make way for agrofuel plantations. Additionally they compromise biodiversity, fuel human rights violations and promote an intensified industrial agriculture, encouraging the production of GM crops, and posing a serious threat to food sovereignty. (Transnational Institute)China Overtakes US as World's Biggest CO2 Emitter (June 19, 2007)
This Guardian article argues that China needs international support to move towards a low-carbon economy as it is still too dependent on coal. Figures released by the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency illustrate that in 2006 China overtook the United States as the world’s biggest producer of CO2 by 8 percent. In 2005 China’s emissions were 2 percent lower than US emissions. This sudden increase will pressure the world’s politicians to agree on a new post Kyoto international treaty which must include China.Poverty Reduction and Climate Change Inextricably Linked, Say Activists (June 5, 2007)
Arguing that the effects of climate change in developing countries “will wipe out all efforts to help the poor through commitments such as aid,” G8 protestors have called for the group of eight industrial nations to take definitive action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The activists underscore the link between global warming and poverty, and state that the 2007 G8 summit must address both simultaneously “for there to be real improvement in [the] living conditions” of the world’s poorest people. (Inter Press Service)Global Warming “Is Three Times Faster Than Worst Predictions” (June 3, 2007)
In the weeks leading up to the 2007 G8 summit – where climate change will be a key issue – a series of authoritative studies have revealed a much faster rate of global warming than that predicted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s 2007 assessment. The studies warn that the IPCC’s “dire forecasts” of increased drought and other natural disasters are “likely understating the threat facing the world.” The Independent reports that this information will increase pressure on G8 leaders to take definitive action.G8 Makes Room at Table for Emerging Five (June 1, 2007)
Reflecting their growing economic and political power, Brazil, China, India, Mexico, and South Africa will attend the G8 summit in Heiligendamm. Among the issues high on the summit agenda is climate change and an international agreement on environmental protection.China and India are two of the world’s worst polluters, but as developing nations, they do not have to abide by the Kyoto Protocol. This Inter Press Service article points out that the European Union is pressuring them to begin using cleaner energy resources.Climate Change: Stop Harming and Start Helping, Oxfam Tells G8 Summit (May 29, 2007)
This Oxfam report argues that the G8 countries owe almost US$50 billion each year to help vulnerable communities adapt to climate change. Although wealthy industrial nations are primarily responsible for greenhouse gas emissions, global warming disproportionately harms the world’s poorest people “who are least able to adapt to climatic shocks.”Profiting From Pollution: The G8 and Climate Change (May 26, 2007)
This Red Pepper article argues that the carbon emissions trading schemes promoted by G8 countries “defer genuine climate action while generating massive profits for the largest polluters.” Although climate change will likely be a key issue on the agenda of the June G8 summit, the author predicts that the meeting will fail to produce effective measures to prevent global warming.US Aims to Stop G8’s Tough Push on Global Warming (May 22, 2007)
As part of Washington’s ongoing effort to undermine the June G8 summit declaration on global warming, the US intends to block all references to the urgency of climate change. This Globe and Mail article reports that the Bush administration plans to replace the declaration’s call for “resolute and concerted international action” with the watered-down statement that climate change “is a long-term issue that will require a diversity of approaches.”GCAP to Take Up Climate Change as a Core Issue (May 21, 2007)
After a “lengthy and heated debate,” the Global Call to Action against Poverty (GCAP) has added climate change to its agenda. GCAP argues that this inclusion will allow discussion on the overlap between global warming and world poverty. However, many poor countries fear that the Western governments will use this as an excuse to focus on climate change and overlook GCAP’s core issues, such as improved development aid, fair trade, and debt relief. (OneWorld)Human Tide: The Real Migration Crisis (May 14, 2007)
Christian Aid warns that climate change will worsen an already serious migration crisis in developing countries. Based on current trends, this report predicts that large-scale development projects, environmental deterioration, and conflict – particularly over increasingly scarce natural resources – may force 1 billion people from their homes by 2050.Farming Will Make or Break Food Chain (May 2, 2007)
Global warming, food and timber exports, and the thirst for biofuels are among the biggest threats to biodiversity, reports this Inter Press Service article. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, a UN-commissioned initiative to study ways to prevent environmental degradation, warns that the loss of just a few species may “result in a collapse” of the Earth’s ecosystem, which could worsen the effects of climate change and diminish the global food supply.The First Refugees of Global Warming (May 2, 2007)
This Chicago Tribune article highlights the problem that inhabitants of low-lying coastal areas face as a result of global climate change. The author argues that the citizens of Bangladesh – a country comprised of many islands – have already started to experience such effects as many people who live along the coast have had to move their houses several times as waters continually swallow up the land.CO2 Row Threatens Climate Report (May 2, 2007)
Environmental groups fear that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) “is using outdated science” as the basis for its recommendations on the safe limit of atmospheric CO2, which more recent scientific studies put at a much lower level. The authors of the third volume of the IPCC’s 2007 assessment report, which proposes specific strategies for the mitigation of climate change, have attempted to amend the policy recommendations to reflect the new data. However, delegates from China have “angrily resisted” any change, arguing that the alterations “threaten to undermine the nation’s drive to tackle poverty” by forcing China to make more radical emissions cuts. (BBC)Carbon-Neutral Is Hip, But Is It Green? (April 29, 2007)
Comparing it to the Catholic Church’s sale of indulgences to offset sins, this New York Times article critiques the growing practice of carbon neutrality, whereby companies or individuals pay for projects – such as planting trees or funding renewable energy sources – to “void” their carbon emissions. Although proponents argue that carbon offsets build support and awareness of the need for sustainable environmental policies, many experts fear that offsets “suggest there’s an easy way out” and will discourage consumers from fundamentally reducing their “carbon footprints.”This Earth Day, a Focus on Earth’s Warming (April 20, 2007)
Recent polls have found “swelling public interest in and concern about” global warming, with a majority in the US agreeing that climate change poses as much of a threat to US national security as terrorism. This Christian Science Monitor article attributes the shift in public opinion to increased media coverage, “high-profile politicians,” and an influx of reports – especially those by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change – warning of the serious effects of global warming.World to US: We Demand Climate Justice (April 18, 2007)
This OneWorld article reports that the United States “exacerbates poverty by contributing more to climate change than any other country.” Global anti-poverty and religious leaders have therefore called on the US government “to take drastic and immediate action” to minimize the greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming, arguing that “the battle against climate change [is] a moral test” for the US.UN Attacks Climate Change as Threat to Peace (April 17, 2007)
For the first time, the United Nations Security Council debated the impact of climate change on global conflicts, especially over food, water, and energy shortages. Although many developing countries objected that “global warming is not an issue of international peace and security” and that the debate “infringes on the authority of other UN organs,” Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon argued that climate change threatens to “transform peaceful competition into violence” and “weaken the ability of countries to resolve conflicts peacefully.” (Associated Press)Global Warming Called Security Threat (April 16, 2007)
This report by the Center for Naval Analyses – a group financed by the US government – finds that global climate change is a threat to US national security and should be incorporated into the country’s security strategies. The report lists some of the potential effects of climate change – such as rising border tensions and increased conflicts over food and water – which could lead to “direct US military involvement.” The authors conclude that the US “should commit to a stronger international role to help stabilize climate change.”Security Council Accused of Overstepping Bounds (April 12, 2007)
Veering from its traditional agenda of preserving international peace and security, the UN Security Council plans to hold a meeting to discuss the issue of climate change. The Group of 77 and the Non-Aligned Movement have denounced this decision as evidence of the SC’s “ever-increasing encroachment” on the mandates of the UN’s other main bodies. Citing the UN Charter, they argue that the Council should only “come into action when there are actual threats to peace or breaches of the peace.” (Inter Press Service)Climate Report: Poor Will Suffer Most (April 6, 2007)
Many of the scientific authors of the second volume of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report argue that objections from the United States, Saudi Arabia and China resulted in a “weakened” and “watered-down” message. Deadlocks between scientists and government negotiators in an all-night editing session almost delayed release of the report. Although the disputes were resolved, the political interference led several scientists to “vow never to take part in the process again.” (Associated Press)Time to Tax the Carbon Dodgers (April 5, 2007)
This BBC commentary calls for a tax on exports from wealthy countries – such as the US and Australia – that have refused to sign the Kyoto Protocol. The author argues that the tax would encourage these governments to “develop responsible climate policies” and could “redress the balance” of production costs between countries that pay for their CO2 emissions and those that “won’t take climate change seriously.”UN to Discuss Climate as Security Issue (April 5, 2007)
For the first time, the UN Security Council has added a discussion of the “potential security ramifications” of global warming to its agenda. Although it will not produce a statement or resolution, UK Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry, the Council president for the month of April, says it is “quite likely” the discussion will lead to a UN summit in 2008 devoted solely to climate change. (Associated Press)Reports from Four Fronts in the War on Warming (April 3, 2007)
While wealthy countries have begun to “gird against” climate change, “poverty, geography and history” leave the world’s least developed countries the most vulnerable. This New York Times article illustrates the varying abilities of countries to adapt to global warming by giving “views of the climate divide” from Malawi, Australia, India, and the Netherlands.Carbon Trading Won’t Work (April 1, 2007)
Many politicians and businesses hail “carbon trading” – whereby companies can buy and sell permits to pollute – as the key to limiting carbon emissions and curbing global warming. However, this Los Angeles Times article points out that this system has become “a license for big polluters to carry on business as usual,” as wealthy corporations are able to purchase cheap carbon permits to offset emissions rather than shifting to more environmentally-friendly practices.Poor Nations to Bear Brunt as World Warms (April 1, 2007)
Although the world’s richest countries have contributed the most toward global warming, the poorest will likely suffer the worst effects. Arguing that “catastrophes are not democratic” and will do more damage to developing countries near the equator, this New York Times article calls on northern industrial nations to fund “adaptation” projects to lessen the impacts of climate change in “the world’s most vulnerable spots.”Scientists Weigh Risks of Climate “Techno-Fixes” (March 29, 2007)
Faced with the increasing threat of climate change, scientists have begun researching geoengineering techniques – such as “space mirrors” that deflect energy from the sun or marine algae that “sucks carbon out of the atmosphere” – to reduce global warming. However, some experts fear that people will see these “techno-fixes” as a cheaper, easier alternative to addressing the root problem of excessive pollution. (Christian Science Monitor)Food, Water Security Threatened by Warming, UN Panel Chief Says (March 28, 2007)
The second installment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) study warns that the effects of global warming may range from the “immediate threat” of food and water insecurity to “irreversible and abrupt changes such as the melting of the Greenland ice sheet.” The IPCC chairman argues that “more research needs to be conducted” into the economic consequences of climate change, especially in the developing countries which will likely “bear the brunt of global warming’s worst effects.” (Bloomberg)Fighting For Air: Frontline of War on Global Warming (March 26, 2007)
This Guardian article argues that Linfen, China, “the most polluted city on earth,” symbolizes “the worst side-effects of…breakneck economic growth.” Although China and India are two of the world’s four biggest emitters of greenhouse gases, both maintain that they must use more energy to stimulate development. Despite the contaminated rivers, melting glaciers, rising temperatures, and increased respiratory diseases in both countries, the article reports that neither is likely to submit to binding commitments to reduce emissions unless the US – the world’s “principal polluter” – first agrees to do the same.Warmer, Warmer (March 22, 2007)
This article for the London Review of Books traces the roots of climate change denial, which remains prevalent despite widespread scientific consensus on the reality of global warming and on its destructive potential. The author attributes this doubt to three “structural flaws”: the politicization of science, its portrayal in the media, and the public’s “faith-based contentment with science” – accepting it without understanding it.Global Warming Can’t Buy Happiness (March 21, 2007)
This Los Angeles Times article argues that consumerism is one of the principal causes behind the growing US contribution to global warming, as the US constantly needs cheap energy to produce and transport goods. Furthermore, despite the assumption that “more is better,” studies show that increased wealth over the past 50 years has had little to no effect on levels of happiness. Therefore, efforts to “rebuild broken communities” by consuming locally grown produce, using public transportation, and decreasing the emphasis on material prosperity could reduce the US impact on climate change while simultaneously improving quality of life.Bush Appointees “Watered Down Greenhouse Science” (March 20, 2007)
This Guardian article reports that the Bush administration “ran a systematic campaign” to cast doubt over the dangers of global warming. Testimony before Congress revealed that political appointees with close ties to the White House made hundreds of “politically motivated changes to scientific reports,” such as downplaying the scientific consensus on climate change, minimizing the effects of human activities on the environment, and inserting “possible benefits” of global warming.Crops Feel the Heat as the World Warms (March 16, 2007)
The Carnegie Institution and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory have found that warming temperatures over the past two decades have reduced major cereal grain crop production by 40 million metric tons per year. The study further “demonstrates that this decline is due to human-caused” global warming, thereby proving the “real effects” of climate change on the global food supply.Warning on Warming (March 15, 2007)
This analysis of the UN’s 2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report calls the document "remarkably conservative," making its conclusion – that human activity is "very likely" causing global warming – all the more surprising. Due to a slow and outdated process of deliberations which requires consensus from all member states, the IPCC’s results are virtually undisputed, but lag several years behind current climate studies. However, even the cautious report recognizes that an immediate "all-out assault" is necessary to curb the dangerous effects of global warming. (New York Review of Books)Poll Finds Worldwide Agreement That Climate Change Is A Threat (March 13, 2007)
An international poll reveals “widespread agreement” that “steps should be taken to address climate change.” Furthermore, a large majority of respondents classified global warming as an “important or critical” threat. However, in only three of the twelve countries surveyed – Australia, Israel, and Argentina – did a majority believe that climate change necessitates “immediate, costly measures.” (World Public Opinion)Climate Report Warns of Drought, Disease (March 10, 2007)
The second report this year of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predicts that, within the next century, global warming will cause increased global food and water shortages, “mass extinction” of polar bears and other animals, and a rise in tropical diseases like malaria. Warning that “things are happening…faster than we expected,” the IPCC reports that only immediate action can prevent “major impacts on human welfare.” (Associated Press)British Push on CO2 at Security Council (March 8, 2007)
Arguing that it poses “a threat to international security,” UK diplomats may propose putting climate change on the UN Security Council agenda. In the face of “mass migrations” and “aggravated disputes” over dwindling natural resources, the UK warns that regulating climate change “is no longer a choice, it is an imperative.” However, reactions from the US and other countries have so far been “less than enthusiastic.” (Guardian)US Predicting Steady Increase for Emissions (March 3, 2007)
Despite a “repeated commitment” to lowering carbon emissions, the US government has yet to impose formal regulations on greenhouse gases. The Bush administration’s long-overdue report to the UN, while acknowledging the “persistent threat” of “human-caused warming,” estimates an 11 percent increase in emissions by 2012. Nevertheless, the US “remains satisfied with voluntary measures to slow emissions.” (New York Times)Confronting Climate Change (February 27, 2007)
In a joint study subtitled “Avoiding the unmanageable and managing the unavoidable,” Sigma Xi and the United Nations Foundation outline “innovative approaches” to both preventing and adapting to climate change. The report calls for immediate action on several fronts, such as reducing carbon emissions, building “climate resilient cities,” and increasing awareness of global warming through the UN and other multilateral institutions.Poll Finds Strong Support in Europe and US for Polluter Taxes (February 23, 2007)
An International Herald Tribune and France 24 poll found that the majority of US and European residents agreed that politicians were failing “to address the challenge of global warming.” Respondents overwhelmingly supported a tax on industrial pollution and called for “responsibility for global warming to bear a financial consequence.” Environmentalists hailed the results as a step forward in combating climate change, and urged governments to take action in response to public opinion.Humans' Beef With Livestock: A Warmer Planet (February 20, 2007)
This Christian Science Monitor article reports that the average meat eater in the US produces 1.5 more tons of carbon dioxide per year than vegetarians. The deforestation to expand pastures and the use of energy in slaughterhouses make the meat industry “one of the most significant contributors” to climate change, causing some researchers to claim that vegetarianism may be “the best way to reduce global warming in our lifetimes.”Time to Begin “Adapting” to Climate Change? (February 13, 2007)
Stating that “climate change is here and now,” officials at the World Bank are hiring experts on adapting to global warming rather than preventing it. This Christian Science Monitor article reports that, although both tactics are necessary to prepare for climate change, many environmentalists view adaptation as the “poorer cousin” to carbon emission reductions.Chairman’s Summary: Shadow G-8 (February 9, 2007)
Joseph Stiglitz summarizes a discussion on “global growth with responsibility” by “a diverse group of concerned citizens from around the world,” including leading economists and former government officials. The resulting consensus calls for a reformed G8 process which would enable participation from all countries “to discuss informally the major issues facing the world,” with a focus on the four immediate problems of climate change, global imbalances, global governance, and poverty, especially in Africa. (Initiative for Policy Dialogue)Scientists Offered Cash to Dispute Climate Study (February 2, 2007)
The American Enterprise Institute (AEI), an ExxonMobil-funded thinktank with close ties to the Bush administration, offered scientists US$10,000 each to undermine the findings of the UN’s 2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report. AEI promised cash and other incentives for essays that “emphasize the shortcomings” of the report, which stated that human activity is “very likely” causing global warming. (Guardian)Investigation Reveals Widespread Suppression of Federal Climate Research (January 30, 2007)
An investigative study published by the Union of Concerned Scientists and the Government Accountability Project reveals “a system-wide epidemic” of political interference in the work of US federal climate scientists, with nearly half of the scientists surveyed reporting some form of government suppression of global warming research. The report urges the federal government to end this censorship and allow scientists to freely communicate the results of climate change studies.New Climate Report Too Rosy, Experts Say (January 29, 2007)
A study by a United Nations panel of 2,500 scientists gives a comprehensive overview of the specific dangers posed by global warming. However, leading environmentalists warn that even this “dire forecast” issued by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) may be overly cautious. This Associated Press article argues that, because the IPCC’s conclusions must be agreed upon unanimously by member states, including the United States and Saudi Arabia, its report likely underestimates the risks of climate change.Economic Forum Confronts "Schizophrenic World" (January 24, 2007)
World Economic Forum founder and chief executive Klaus Schwab opened the 2007 gathering in Davos, Switzerland with an account of the “major threats to globalization,” including climate change, income disparities, and political and economic instability. This Inter Press Service article reports that the meeting was quick to highlight these “global risks,” but that it failed to present any serious discussion on solutions.Hawking Warns: We Must Recognize the Dangers of Climate Change (January 18, 2007)
The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists moved the minute hand of its “Doomsday Clock” two minutes forward to reflect the combined global threats of nuclear conflagration and, for the first time, climate change. The Clock, which now reads five minutes to midnight, was originally designed to represent humanity’s proximity to nuclear apocalypse. Now, however, according to cosmologist Stephen Hawking, “the dangers posed by climate change are nearly as dire as those posed by nuclear weapons.” (Independent)Charging Towards the Big Melt (January 15, 2007)
This Inter Press Service piece argues that “over-consumption,” especially in North America and Europe, is a significant cause of climate change. Countries such as China which export low-cost goods use environmentally damaging practices to keep prices down. To decrease demand for these products, consumers must become “environmentally and socially conscious,” which, according to the article, entails buying less and being willing to pay more for goods that are manufactured sustainably.Do Carbon Offsets Live Up to Their Promise? (January 10, 2007)
The idea of funding renewable energy sources or planting trees to offset carbon emissions has become increasingly popular among corporations and consumers. However, environmentalists continue to debate the validity of this “carbon neutrality” as a way to combat climate change. Because offsetting techniques have varying degrees of effectiveness, they remain “unclear at best, and potentially fraudulent at worst.” Furthermore, critics fear people will view voluntary offsets as permission to continue to pollute. (Christian Science Monitor)Carbon Offsetting: All Credit to Them (January 4, 2007)
Due to high carbon emissions, “air travel has become one of the fastest-growing causes of global warming,” reports this Independent article. The UK firm Climate Care seeks to offset some of that damage by using donations from travelers eager to “clear their environmental consciences.” Visitors to its website can calculate carbon emissions from their flights and the cost to offset them. Climate Care then uses that money to replace high-emission technology in poor countries with more energy-efficient and environmentally-friendly devices.Scientists' Report Documents ExxonMobil's Tobacco-like Disinformation Campaign on Global Warming Science (January 3, 2007)
In order to delay action on climate change, ExxonMobil has given nearly US $16 million in funding to groups promoting “climate change contrarians.” By financing these organizations, ExxonMobil seeks to cause confusion and doubt over global warming, labeling it “junk science.” A new report by the Union of Concerned Scientists compares the oil company’s disinformation tactics with those of Big Tobacco in previous decades.
Archived Articles
