PHOTO OF THE TUVALU ISLANDS (DESTINATED TO DISAPPEAR IF THE NATIONS WILL NOT REDUCE THE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS)

martedì 22 dicembre 2009

THE COPENAGHEN CLIMATE CHANGE CONFERENCE? A BIG FIASCO

The agreement among the head of states and governments (the small capital letter is needed) reached at the Climate Change Conferenze in Copenagher is a no-agreement. I have never seen a usefuless document like that. The agreement is composed of 12 clauses, for a total of only 3 pages (the Kyoto protocol and the Montreal Agreement have respectively 18 and 45 pages plus annexes) and two annexes COMPLETELY VOIDS, without a single word !! If we would not speak about a planetary problem, we could joke by telling that there was more participating nations than the rows written in the document. Let perform a short analysis of the agreement.
In the first clause, the document underlines that the climate change is a challenge and that, to avoid anthropogenic problems, the long term cooperation among the nations shall be enhanced (an obvious recommendation). The document also recognizes (fortunately) the scientific point of vies that the temperature increasing should (please, not the conditional) be under 2 Celsius degree. What else? In the second clause, all agree (fortunately) that deep cuts in the emission are required, with a “ view to reduce global emissions so as to hold the increase in global temperature below 2 degrees Celsius”, but the nations “should cooperate in achieving the peaking of GLOBAL AND NATIONAL EMISSIONS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE” (the capital letters are mine). Two things are sure: the greenhouse gas emission will increase and we don’t know for how long time. Moreover, for the developing countries it is recognized that “the time frame for peaking will be longer “. The problem is that in the developing countries list there is also the China, the main CO2 emitter with the USA. And what about if Chine becomes a developed country? It would still be authorized to emit as a developing nations? This is a non-sense clause. In the third clause, the countries indicate that are required “Enhanced action and international cooperation on adaptation ….. to ensure the implementation of the Convention by enabling and supporting the implementation of adaptation actions aimed at reducing vulnerability and building resilience in developing countries, … especially least developed countries, small island developing States and Africa. “ This is a non sense either, at least for the islands. How can save the small islands from the sea level increasing? Building fortress around the islands and destroying their value? Anoter non-sense in the agreement is the division in nations that accept to cut the emissions, indicating the quantity of their 2020 emission reduction, and nations that, on the contrary, will implement some not well defined “mitigation actions”, not subject to international control: this nation will only notify (to who is not written) their emission. In other words, some nations would be induced to distort their data of the emission. The agreements end with same clauses dealing with the money to developing countries (30 billion of dollars in the time frame 2010-2012 with the goal to mobilize jointly 100 billion dollars per year by 2020. What we can say? The risk is that, with this agreement, nothing will happen. The scientific community via the l’International Panel for Climate Change (IPCC) Fourth Assesment Report, indicates that the temperature trend, in the last 25 years, has been of a 0.17 Celsius degree increase. Therefore, in order to comply with the agreement, it would be sufficient to maintain the emission growth from 1993 to today. The developing countries (China first of all) could try to increase their emission in spite of the emission decrease of the developed countries. Moreover, the small islands asked to have a CO2 concentration of 350 ppm. The problem is that, with the current trends, the IPCC indicates an increase of CO2 emission equal to 1.4 ppm per year and, therefore, the CO2 concentration in 2020 will be largely more than 400 ppm, with problems of submersions of the small islands. The agreement is distressing, it was only a theater for the head of nations and governments. The only serious voice has been, for me, the California Governor Schwarzenegger (a right party exponent), who said that no agreement is possible without a bottom-up involvement: not only governments but also NGOs, Regions, People, Society. Those are words that would induce the world leader to re-think their role and their political view.


Nessun commento:

Posta un commento