Monday 21 December 2009

A lesson in Geopolitics.

Well that's it, Copenhagen talks simply paralysed by the growing chasm between rich and poor countries. The accord finally pushed out by the U.S., China, India, Brazil and South Africa did not receive the universal support from the 193 countries represented and provoked reactions from fury to despair. Sudan's chief negotiator compared it to the Holocaust! Hugo Chavez talked of the sulphur of hell and suggested that Obama was Satan. Ian Fry of the drowning island of Tuvalu likened the accord "to being offered 30 pieces of silver to betray our people of the future".
We need to pick ourselves up, dust ourselves down and , well, pretty much start all over again. However, surely you didn't expect a sweeping deal out of Copenhagen, not if you considered today's polarised and charged geopolitics. The rift between rich and poor countries is wide, and the chasm paralysed the negotiations.
China opposed key elements of proposals, not least (unsurprisingly) external monitoring of greenhouse gas emissions and yet had moved very far coming into the talks. India too found some proposals one too far and then retreated to a fail safe position. The World's changing political land is partly why even Obama's last minute brokering did not produce something powerful. Many in G77 see Obama forming a league of super-polluters and would-be super polluters, a coalition of foxes who would together govern the hen house.

Well, well are we all doomed? The accord is better than no accord, even if below our ambition and well short of what is desperately required. They are all going to have to go back to their capitals and think long and hard. Meanwhile lets see what we've got.
Copenhagen has given us the first significant climate fund for poor nations, promising $30bn over the next three years and to raise $100million in yearly climate financing for poor countries. A deal was struck helping developing economies convert to green energy. Not enough I fear.
The question is whether these initial financial commitments are seen by developing countries as an incremental step that moves towards figures they see as sufficient.
The next UN climate conference in Mexico in 2010 will present many of the same challenges that faced leaders in Copenhagen, it will be very interesting to see how they approach this one. They should all remember that flood, drought, fire and all the other effects of rampant global warming are indiscriminate, a category 5 hurricane hitting, say Miami would be no less damaging than a typhoon hitting Bangladesh, global warming is not just a problem for the developing World.

Wednesday 16 December 2009

Glam, Grim and Glum.

Good to see so many famous faces giving their best in Copenhagen, or "Hopenhagen" as it now is. We have the Glam Arnie, the Grim Gordon and the Glum Prince amongst many others. Fine words from these guys, some great ideas coming forward (not least the "Tobin Tax", brilliant)... now sign on the line please.
Given the amount of coverage of COP15, and that it all hangs in the balance, I thought I'd rather comment on Mr Cameron's proposals this week, just to give you a break from talks in Denmark. Poor Mr Cameron, not in Copenhagen, no one asked him so he's reduced to waving his arms around and huffing and puffing over here.
Having said that, I do like his comment that environmentalism is becoming "limited to well-suited politicians stepping out of aeroplanes on to tarmac" although I suspect he rather wishes he was just such a figure, out there on the tarmac with Glam, Grim and Glum.
So, what is it that he's been working up, ready to unleash as soon as he's over the threshold of No.10 and sorted out a space in the shed for his bicycle? Well, he's a Tory so he likes the capitalist system above all else and likes to get into bed with big successful money makers. Off to see the big retailers then, first port of call Tesco and M&S who with David's help are going to "share our savings on energy", thanks.
Here's the scheme; Tesco or other High Street oligarch, will fit out the lowly householder with a basic pack of energy saving measures, insulation and the like. In return Tesco, or other High Street oligarch shares in the resultant cost savings from the energy supplier who is likely to be err, Tesco (or other High Street oligarch). We'll be able to share our savings with them for a number of years.
Now, I don't want to be unkind to Mr Tesco or any other High Street oligarch but I never did think that these guys had an understanding of the word "altruistic". Although it has been wonderful that they have halved the number of plastic bags they have to buy, and wonderful too that they can sell us such profitable "bags for life" and give us some extra "green points" on our loyalty card.
Now, I think I'll get back to the very serious issue of the talks in Copenhagen, cross my fingers for a sensible outcome and pick out the salient parts for you in my next missive.

Sunday 6 December 2009

Good Luck Delegates (on yer bike sceptics).

It is the eve of the Copenhagen Climate Change talks. A binding treaty agreed by all countries seems unlikely but we hope for far reaching and accelerating policies from all to stimulate action and protect our environment for future generations.
Ahead of all this has been a catalogue of distractions; e mail leaks discrediting climatologists, a rise of voices sceptical of the influence by mankind on World climate, sloping shoulders, disinformation, exaggeration, politicisation and procrastination! There is a lot to be gained by those with a vested interest in debunking climate change evidence and diluting desired outcomes of the Copenhagen summit, not least the value of their shares.
I clutch my head in anguish as I listen or read the climate change sceptics. They clearly have a personal agenda which is thinly veiled greed. They are old timers, living in the past.
Lets take the atmosphere first.... whether you are a climatologist, a president, a pauper or an apologist, it's there, but it's tiny. How far to Space? About 62miles, an atmosphere 62 miles thick on a planet 8000 miles across, it's tiny. It's thin and delicate and contains all known life. Belch around 80 million tonnes of CO2e into it every day, an unprecedented amount, and it seems to me you're asking for trouble. That's not naivety, that's common sense.
The exploitative nature of energy procurement and use is just SO 20th century! Lets move on. Just as horse power fizzled out in the 19th century, so motor power should have done so in the 20th. Time for better, we move on. The car has reached the limit of it's capability and excellence, at best we can improve on it only by adding another superfluous device, "oh good electric windows", "oh good speed indicator on the windscreen", a breakthrough for mankind, no not really, they're backward steps that each in their small way increase division and inequality.
Time for new and better and hope and action and if we need the excuse of climate change to do it, jolly good. Stop protecting the status quo (no, not the bloody band, although they are of course a world treasure) and protect the environment around you.
Which would you rather have? A giant, smoking concrete stack requiring huge swaths of land to be dug up every day to provide the fuel for them to produce your electricity (not to mention the terrible working conditions for those having to do it) or a slowly revolving propeller gracefully sweeping round? Away with you nimby wind turbine protestors!
Good luck Copenhagen delegates, the World needs you.