Climate change - Australian business continues action where the Australian Government fears to tread

                                                                                                                              Shutterstock

The launch this week of the  Australian chapter of the Climate Governance Initiative Network by the Australian Institute of Company Directors (AICD) continues the now established trend of business action to address climate change. Major corporations, industry peak bodies, central banks, government regulators to name a few, have all accepted the science behind climate change, albeit almost too late. This definitive recognition contrasts with the Australian Government which continues to operate with the ponderously slow objective of reducing carbon emissions by 2050.
 

The Climate Governance Initiative Network has been developed "due to the urgent need to address the climate emergency and requires government and business to accelerate the transition to a new economic model which seeks to limit global average temperature increase to 1.5 degrees C above pre-industrial levels, consistent with the 2018 recommendations of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)" 

The network operates by supporting groups of directors around the world to form networks, known as Chapters. The core mission of these chapters is to promote the implementation of the 'Principles for Effective Climate Governance' published by the World Economic Forum (WEF). 

Information about the network can be found at this link: Climate Governance Initiative Network

The World Economic Forum's (WEF) position is well described in the opening comments in the Forum's guidance to company boards -

"The links between climate change and business are becoming increasingly evident and inextricable. Business decisions and actions will slow or accelerate climate change, and climate change will drive risks and opportunities for business. Increasingly, board directors are expected to ensure that climate-related risks and opportunities are appropriately addressed. However, limited practical guidance is available to help board directors understand their role in addressing these risks and opportunities...  good governance should intrinsically include effective climate governance'

A resource for boards on the Climate Governance Principles by the WEF can be found at this link:

World Economic Forum - Creating effective climate governance on corporate boards

The question immediately arises is to whether this objective is already too little, too late. The newly released report by the IPCC has found climate change is already underway and limiting a temperature increase to below 1.5 degrees Celsius is now impossible. The challenge is now to prevent the situation getting any worse and adapting to the inevitable difficult environmental conditions already evident.

Eastern Australia January 2020 - burning and fires - the influence of climate change

NSW Rural Fire Service fire ground map

Summer in Australia each year brings the bush fire season with hot weather, low rainfall and high humidity matched with regular electrical storms with more lightning than precipitation. Over meteorological history, the peak period in Australia has tended to be around late January to February for bush fires. Increasingly however this high risk timeframe has come earlier and now commences at the end of Autumn in the preceding year. Temperatures have been hotter at earlier points in time and rainfall has become less dispersed over the land and more concentrated within the period when it does fall. Droughts or floods are the obvious, extreme result.

This measure of impact is the actual influence of climate change in its earliest form at around 1.3C to 1.4C temperature increase. Climate change does not mean that the planet will suddenly be a tropical hothouse as those whom deny human-induced change constantly state, but rather the extremities with weather are now amplified many times over.  This provides an early window into how severe the changes will be if the current inadequate or lack of action continues.

                                                                         Shutterstock

Climate Change Insight: The IPCC and the Assessment Reports - Based on fact rather than fiction.

Recent media reports have been speculating that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is likely to backtrack on the level of global warming which has occured and instead state that global warming has only been around  half  of the level presented in its' previous reports. This odd media speculation has already been found to be based on various false and misleading statements without evidence nor facts. Correspondingly the IPCC is about to release the first stage of its' Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) with the other parts to be delivered progressively over 2013–2014.

When the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) releases one of its major reports, it’s an assessment that collects and summarises current knowledge regarding climate change. This is undertaken using peer reviewed literature and unreviewed (grey) sources of science data. The reports from the IPCC are considered to be the leading review globally of climate change and are drafted and reviewed literally by a team of hundreds of scientists and specialists from a diverse range of disciplines.

The IPCC itself is organised into three Working Groups and a Taskforce.  Working Group I covers “The Physical Science Basis of Climate Change”, Working Group II addresses “Climate Change Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability”, and Working Group III deals with “Mitigation of Climate Change”. The Task Force refines the methodology for the calculation and reporting of national greenhouse gas emissions and reductions. All these groups have two co-chairs, one from a developed country and one from a developing country.

To given an idea of the scale of involvement from the worldwide science communtiy, the First Order Draft of Working Group I for the forthcoming AR5 report for example received 21,400 comments from 659 experts. The AR5’s Second Order Draft for Working Group I received 31,422 comments from about 800 experts and 26 governments.

 

The timeline for the three key areas examined in the AR5 are:

• the physical science – Working Group I (September 2013)
• impacts, vulnerabilities and adaptation – Working Group II (March 2014)
• mitigation options scenarios – Working Group III (April 2014) 

A final synthesis report to be released in October 2014, will provide an overview of all of these three areas.

Australia's climate is changing - Climate Commission

The latest report from the Climate Commission, a body created by the Australian Government, continues the regular reporting of climate change data gathering which is simultaneously both mundane and yet necessary in importance. The Climate Commission report has found a variety of mixed results but with one overarching impact - that extreme weather events are becoming more frequent and with a higher intensity. As one example, for the cities of Melbourne, Adelaide and Canberra, the annual number of hot days is increasing more quickly than expected and is already at the level projected for 2030. For another key statistic, sea level has risen by 0.21m and is continuing to rise as the ocean becomes warmer while glaciers and polar ice sheets melt with warmer temperatures. Even a sea-level rise of 0.5m would lead to flooding frequency increasing by several hundred times compared to the baseline data (taken for the period prior to global warming).  A multiplying factor of 100 means that the oft-termed 'one-in-a-hundred' year flooding event can now happen almost annually.

The Forest Fire Danger Index, one of the key measures of bushfire threat has increased at 16 of the 38 weather stations across Australia between 1973 and 2010 with none of the stations recording a significant decrease. The report again underscores the need for further efforts to reduce CO2 emissions at the same time as addressing the need for more adjustment mechanisms for sustainability.

World Bank calls for action on climate change

The World Bank has joined the call for greater action on climate change with the release of its' report titled "Turn Down the Heat". According to the Bank, the planet is plausibly on track to reach 4 degrees Celsius in warming above pre-industrial levels as early as 2060 which is double the 2 degrees Celsius threshold established as the target by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to mitigate climate change. A world with a 4 degree C increase would experience major floods, unprecedented heatwaves and negative impacts on ecosystems and human services. This reflects the warning conveyed in the IPCC's 4th Assessment in 2007 and the IPCC has already indicated that the 5th Assessment Report due in 2013 will reinforce the view that current CO2 emissions have been increasing rather than declining. The World Bank warns that a 4 degree C warming would have stronger impacts in some parts of the planet than others, particularly the Middle East, North Africa, the Mediterranean and the contiguous United States which would have summers hotter than the most extreme heatwaves to date. For Australia, the interior of the continent would be uninhabitable during the Summer months with knock-on effects on water, agriculture and population distribution. The acidification of the oceans would also mean impacts on coral reefs with a corresponding loss of food sources, income, tourism and shoreline protection - all of which apply to Australia.

The report makes sobering reading but equally underscores the critical message that there is still time to act, but only if the action is today and not put off until tomorrow.

 

The full report can be accessed at this link: http://bit.ly/UO5GNq

Kyoto II and a low carbon future - there is no Plan B

Executive Director of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), Christiana Figueres, addressed a standing-room only lunchtime gathering at the Lowy Institute for International Policy on Wednesday 24 October 2012.

She reviewed progress with the establishing a low-carbon future emphasising that every nation and every sector of society holds part of the solution to solving a global problem and a top-down level approach on its own will not work. The international climate change negotiations are the intergovernmental face of this global trend towards a low-carbon future with the next step in the international response to climate change, being in Doha, this year.

She made three key points in her speech starting with a negative reality but balanced with two positive trends. First the negative reality is the progress has been slow and the world is well behind the targets needed to manage climate change and greenhouse gas emissions.

The positive points are that a large number of countries are implementing carbon reduction and emission trading schemes or equivalent. Australia is not alone in developing a response and the Clean Energy Future policy of the Australian Government is in line with policies being taken overseas by many countries including many of Australia's trading partners - China, South Korea and Singapore.

 

She observed that she is often asked what she has for “Plan B” if the negotiations fail. Her response: “There is no Plan B for there is no Planet B. There’s no alternative for we only have one planet and failure is not an option”.

Rio + 20: two decades further in time

Twenty years ago, the United Nations organised the Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED)  from 3 June to 14 June 1992 otherwise known as the 'Earth Summit' in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The Rio Earth Summit was focussed on a number of critical global issues such as: patterns of production and the use of toxic substances; alternative sources of energy to reduce reliance and remove the use of fossil fuels; the use of public transport to reduce emissions and the increasing scarcity of water. The Summit also agreed on the Climate Change Convention (preceding the Kyoto Protocol) and opened the Convention on Biological Diversity for signatories of member states.

 

       In less than a month's time the UN is again bringing governments, international institutions and major groups together to seek agreement on a range of smart measures that can reduce poverty while promoting jobs, clean energy and a more sustainable and fair use of resources. The UN has initially outlined the two main themes of the Summit as: "How to build a green economy to achieve sustainable development and lift people out of poverty, including support for developing countries that will allow them to find a green path for development; and how to improve international coordination for sustainable development".

Does the direction have a familiar sound to it ? It does, for the aims of the original Earth Summit are as relevant today as twenty years ago showing that much progress continues to lag behind actual need. In terms of reality, the Conference on Sustainable Development is a Conference on Survivability.

The sobering truth about preventing climate change

Listening to the various Government announcements (including the UN) and international science debates on climate change and the reduction of Green House Gas (mainly CO2) emissions, a very subtle difference in tone has occured in recent years. Although much of the rhetoric is still focussed on reducing carbon emissions to prevent more than a 2 degree C climb in temperature, increasingly the terminology has shifted to "adaptation" and "transformation". In essence although the focus has remained on message, slowly but surely there is a dawning realisation that turning around carbon emissions from the current production-oriented world cannot occur in sufficient time and with the required level of magnitude to prevent a change in the world's climate. Therefore the direction has moved to adapting to a warmer and more unpredictable climate with changes in building design, settlement patterns, agricultural crop location, choice  of crop species and so on. 'Sustainability' has in reality become a cover word for survival.

Where to now for supporting action on climate change?

The Lowy Institute has released the findings of its latest annual public opinion poll from  a representative (cross section) opinion survey of 1,002 Australian adults conducted in Australia between 30 March and 14 April 2011. The latest data is from the seventh annual Lowy Poll. Of particular note is the findings on climate change opinion which is showing a level of 'fatigue' for the issue and falling support:
-------------------------------------------------
Climate change
A large majority (75%) of Australians say the Federal government has done a poor job addressing climate change, with 39% saying it has done a very poor job. Support for taking tough action to address climate change continues to erode. The foreign policy goal of tackling climate change is considered very important by only 46% of Australians, down seven percentage points from last year and down 29 points from 2007. Support for the most aggressive form of action to address global warming slipped five points from last year, with 41% saying global warming is a serious and pressing problem and  that we should begin taking steps now even if this involves significant costs.
_____________________________________


The Lowy Poll reinforces the reality that endless debate leading to little resolution or positive action loses public support.

Cancun and COP16 - progress continues in small steps

From the news reports from COP16 Cancun there appears to be some further incremental developments for international cooperation on climate change. From the Wall Street Journal -

CANCUN, Mexico—The world's nations on Saturday agreed to a package of climate initiatives, including billions of dollars in funding for poor countries, although they failed to adopt a binding climate treaty amid a stalemate among the U.S., China, Japan and other nations.

The agreement calls on rich countries to cut their greenhouse gas emissions by amounts nations pledged a year ago, although the cuts aren't legally binding. Developing countries are to come up with plans to cut their emissions in a worldwide effort to limit global warming to less than 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels. The agreement includes plans for a green fund and $100 billion a year that wealthier countries would provide by 2020 to help poor countries finance programs to cut emissions and cope with drought and other effects of global warming.

A stalemate among the U.S., China, Japan, India and other countries has frozen talks on a global climate treaty and thrown into question the future of the existing Kyoto Protocol climate treaty. But diplomats said they hoped the Cancun plan could pave the way for a legally binding climate treaty when governments reconvene at next year's U.N. climate summit in Durban, South Africa.

Japan has said that it wouldn't commit to a second phase of the Kyoto treaty unless the world's largest greenhouse-gas emitters, namely China, the U.S. and India, agreed to cut their emissions under a legally binding treaty. The first phase of the treaty ends in 2012.

The U.S., which signed but never ratified the Kyoto treaty, has long argued that it wouldn't agree to mandated emission cuts unless China and other fast-growing economies also agreed to limit emissions. But at climate negotiations a year ago in Copenhagen, both the U.S. and China made voluntary commitments to cut their greenhouse gas emissions.

China has maintained that as a developing country, it doesn't have the resources—or responsibility—to aggressively cut emissions while growing its economy.

India initially had a similar position, although the country softened it this week, saying it would consider agreeing to mandated cuts at some point in the future.

Getting onto Carbon Emissions - the United States

The United States House of Representatives passed legislation on Friday last week intended to address global warming and transform the way the US produces and uses energy. It's the first time that either House of the US Congress had approved a bill meant to curb the heat-trapping gases which have been linked to climate change by a plethora of scientists and institutions worldwide. As the New York Times reports, the legislation could lead to profound changes in many sectors of the economy, including electric power generation, agriculture, manufacturing and construction.

Of note, the bill passed by a vote of 219 to 212, with 44 Democrats voting against it, and only eight Republicans voting for the bill. It remains concerning that the margin of the vote in favour was so small on such a critical issue. Nonetheless it will assist the United States when international negotiations on a new climate change treaty begin at the end of this year in Copenhagen.

The critical feature of the legislation is a cap-and-trade system which sets a limit on overall emissions of heat-trapping gases and allows utilities, manufacturers and other emitters to trade pollution permits, or allowances, among themselves. The cap would grow tighter over the years, pushing up the price of emissions and presumably driving industry to find cleaner ways of making energy. This is a standard approach in carbon emission trading schemes although it is often a contentious method if the timeline for emission reduction is too long.

As difficult as House passage proved, as the New York Times comments, it's just the beginning of the energy and climate debate in Congress. The issue now moves to the Senate, where political divisions and regional differences are even more stark.

The legislation is a patchwork of compromises and does fall far short of what many European governments and environmentalists have said is needed is essential to avert the worst effects of global warming which is steadily bearing down on the planet. While some environmentalists enthusiastically supported the legislation, others, including Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth, opposed it. The US response is indeed weaker than the direction taken by the European Union. The bill has a number of key components nonetheless-

• A goal of reducing greenhouse gases in the United States to 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020, and 83 percent by midcentury.


• Sets a national standard of 20 percent for the production of renewable electricity by 2020, although a third of that could be met with efficiency measures rather than renewable energy sources like solar, wind and geothermal power.


• Devotes billions of dollars to new energy projects and subsidies for low-carbon agricultural practices, research on cleaner coal and electric vehicle development.

Overall however this is a good step forward by the United States and one which will enable greater leverage for American negotiators in Copenhagen. It also sends a message to China, India and Russia that the US is finally moving on this issue which should provide a greater incentive for those countries not to delay taking action as well.