The New Nation - Internet Edition

State of the World 2009

The following is Dr. Rajendra K. Pachauri's foreword to State of the World 2009: Into a Warming World, which will be published by the Worldwatch Institute next week. Dr. Pachauri will be keynoting the 13th Annual State of the World Symposium in Washington, D.C. on January 15, 2009.

The Worldwatch Institute's State of the World reports have evolved into a remarkable source of intellectual wealth that provides understanding and insight not only on the physical state of this planet but on human systems as they are linked with ecosystems and natural resources around the world. It is especially heartening that the focus of State of the World 2009 is on climate change.

The contents of this volume are of particular interest as they are based on the findings of the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and provide a comprehensive overview of the policy imperatives facing humanity as we come to grips with this all-important challenge confronting the world today. The IPCC report provided the global community with up-to-date knowledge through an overall assessment of climate change that went substantially beyond its Third Assessment Report. On the basis of strong and robust scientific evidence, the IPCC stated clearly that "warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as is now evident from observations of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice, and rising global average sea level." The evidence from observations of the past 150 years or so leads to some profound conclusions. For instance, 11 of the last 12 years are among the 12 warmest years ever recorded in terms of global surface temperature.

This edition of State of the World brings out clearly the difference between inaction based on a business-as-usual approach and action to mitigate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in order to avoid the worst impacts of climate change. U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has rightly called climate change "the defining challenge of our age." Several world leaders have made similar statements to highlight the importance of taking climate change seriously when developing initiatives and plans for the future. State of the World 2009 has framed the challenge appropriately by emphasizing the importance of not only new technologies but also a very different approach in terms of human behavior and choices. An important element of future solutions is a different form of global governance-one that would create a high level of seriousness in the implementation of global agreements.

It is profoundly disappointing, for example, that although the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) came into existence in 1992 it took five more years to provide the convention with an agreement that could be implemented-the Kyoto Protocol. A further source of disappointment is the fact that the Kyoto Protocol, which required ratification by a minimum number of countries accounting for a specific share of greenhouse gas emissions, did not enter into force until 16 February 2005. All of this, unfortunately, provides a sad commentary on the importance that the global community has accorded the problem so far.

It was against this dismal record of inaction, and just after the release of the Synthesis Report of the recent IPCC report, that hopes were raised that the Thirteenth Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC, held in Bali in December 2007, would finally agree on some firm action on an agreement beyond 2012, the final year covered by the Kyoto Protocol. The meeting was even rescheduled to four weeks after the Synthesis Report was due to be published, so that the delegates would have time to study the IPCC's findings. The Bali Action Plan that was adopted, following a great deal of debate and discussion, certainly provides hope for the future.

It is gratifying that the discussions in Bali-and certainly the final declaration-were based predominantly on the assessment contained in the Synthesis Report, the final document in IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report.

State of the World 2009 has been structured logically into chapters that clearly explain the sequence that must guide our understanding of the problem and help set directions for taking action. Particularly relevant is the explanation of what would constitute a safe level of concentration of GHGs. Recall that the main objective of the UNFCCC is stabilization of GHGs in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with Earth's climate system. Article 2 of the treaty notes that such a level should be achieved within a time frame sufficient to allow ecosystems to adapt naturally to climate change, ensure that food production is not threatened, and enable economic development to proceed in a sustainable manner. Unfortunately, understanding what level of emissions would actually be dangerous is still not clear in policymaking circles around the world.

Several commentators in recent months have expressed deep concern at the current imbalance in the global market for foodgrains, which has hurt some of the poorest people on Earth. There is now mounting evidence that foodgrain output would be threatened by climate change, particularly if the average temperature were to reach 2.5 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels. Some regions of the world would, of course, be affected far more than others.

In Africa, for instance, 75-250 million people would experience water stress as early as 2020 as a consequence of climate change. Some countries on that continent may also be suffering from a 50-percent decline in agricultural yields by then.

The definition of what constitutes dangerous anthropogenic interference is therefore directly related to specific locations, because not only are the impacts of climate change likely to vary substantially across the planet but the capacity to adapt is also very diverse in different societies.

What could be labeled as a dangerous level of anthropogenic interference may have already been reached or even exceeded in some parts of the world. Some small island states, for instance, often with land areas not more than a meter or two above sea level, face serious risks from flooding and storm surges that represent a major threat to life and property even today.

Mitigation measures that can help stabilize the concentration of GHGs in the atmosphere have been assessed as generally very low in cost, and most of these carry large-scale co-benefits that in effect reduce the costs further quite significantly.

State of the World 2009 clearly explains the benefits of harnessing low-carbon energy on "a grand scale." The world has been slow in adopting some of these energy options simply because we have not as yet taken full advantage of economies of scale.

Nor have we carried out adequate research and development that would allow new technologies to evolve effectively within a short period of time. One important way to develop and disseminate appropriate technologies would be to place a price on carbon, which would provide significant incentives to producers as well as consumers. But there is also an important role for regulatory measures, standards, and codes that can lay down appropriate benchmarks to be observed in different sectors of the economy. Government policy, therefore, will be an important driver of action in the right direction for mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions.

The strongest message from State of the World 2009 is this: if the world does not take action early and in adequate measure, the impacts of climate change could prove extremely harmful and overwhelm our capacity to adapt. At the same time, the costs and feasibility of mitigation of GHG emissions are well within our reach and carry a wealth of substantial benefits for many sections of society. Hence, it is essential for the world to look beyond business as usual and stave off the crisis that faces us if we fail to act.

This publication comes at a time when governments are focused on reaching an agreement in Copenhagen at the end of 2009 to tackle the challenge of climate change. It will undoubtedly influence the negotiators from different countries to look beyond the narrow and short-term concerns that are far too often the reason for inaction. Indeed, we all need to encourage and join them in showing a determination and commitment to meet this global challenge before it is too late.

(Dr. Pachauri is the Director General of The Energy and Resources Institute and Chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Source: Environmental News Network)

The road to a Post-Kyoto climate pact

Daniel Nelson

Next stop on the road to the climate change summit in Copenhagen in December is Bonn in March (Mar. 29-Apr. 8).

Participants are expected from most national governments, international organizations, and a number of non-governmental organizations (NGOs), though there will be fewer NGOs than flocked to the recent jamboree in Poznan.

The meeting will give governments (working both individually and within regional or economic groups) another chance to put proposals on the table for inclusion in the text to be negotiated -- and, it is to be hoped, agreed -- in Copenhagen. The outcome will in effect be the first draft of a Copenhagen agreement, which will be tabled in June.

The meeting could provide the first formal indication of what the new Obama administration wants to see -- or not see -- in the Copenhagen deal.

A second, larger, more important meeting takes place in Bonn Jun. 1-12. About 2,000 participants are expected. They will whittle down and rationalize the draft agreement, producing what one UN source describes as "the first draft of the real thing." A European Union suggestion for ministerial participation, to give the meeting added weight, has received little support.

Another two-week meeting -- the date for which will be fixed in March -- will be held in September or October. With the summit looming, this meeting will be more "technical," focusing on reaching agreement on specific words and phrases and on narrowing options in the text.

If progress is slow, another technical meeting might be called either in August or October.

Two other key events will feed into the process: the G8 summit of industrialized countries on the Italian island of La Maddalena in June (with Australia, Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Mexico, South Africa, and South Korea in attendance), and a one-day heads of state (or government) summit as a side-show at the UN General Assembly gathering in September.

Heads of state will also use the opportunity provided by the General Assembly speech-making to have "small bilaterals," face-to-face, one-on-one discussions between themselves that could iron out differences and agree compromises on contentious issues. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon will probably send emissaries to heads of state before the meeting, drawing attention to points that need sorting out.

Ideally, an informal consensus among leaders at this informal summit in New York will provide guidelines and impetus for officials responsible for finalizing the text to which politicians will sign up in the final days of the Copenhagen summit.

Although the aim at Copenhagen will be to agree a single document, negotiations during the year will be on two tracks:

· firstly, between industrialized countries on mid-term cuts (that is, by 2020) in global warming emissions that they will agree to make under the Kyoto Protocol, and how the reductions can be achieved -- use of renewable energy or nuclear power, for example; at the same time, the other Protocol signatories will be discussing how ambitious they are prepared to be in setting emission reduction targets;

· secondly, the 192 countries taking part in the Copenhagen negotiations (including the United States, which has not signed up to Kyoto) are focusing on the "building blocks" on which an overall agreement will be based: adaptation to climate change, mitigation, transfer of technology (to help developing countries switch to climate-friendly development), and finance.

The aim is that the two negotiating tracks will come together in an agreement specifying the targets of industrialized countries, the financial and technological support to developing countries to enable them to reduce their emissions without curbing their efforts to fight poverty, and the institutions that will deliver the support. Officials servicing the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change say that not all the technical details need to be resolved at Copenhagen, but these three elements must be agreed for the conference to be termed a success.

The agreed outcome will then need to be ratified so that it can enter into force in 2013, the year after the expiry of the first phase of the Kyoto Protocol.

(Source: OneWorld.net)

Flying high with jatropha

Rony V. Diaz

Last week, Air New Zealand flew a 4-engine Boeing 747 with one engine running on a 50-percent jatropha mix.

The test was a success but obviously it's only the first of a series.

Japan Airlines announced that next month it would also test a biofuel mix on one of its planes.

Continental Airlines however took a chance with a 2-engine plane, a bolder challenge than with a 4-engine jetliner.

Continental also used a biofuel additive made from jatropha and algae oils. The 2-hour flight was also successful.

Since July last year, when the price of oil spiked to $140 per barrel, airlines have been looking for fuel alternatives.

Although the price of crude has gone down in recent days to about $40 per barrel, airline executives are still determined to make their operation less dependent on traditional jet fuel.

As John Hemlich, the chief economist of the Air Transport Association, told The New York Times last month: "It's hard to plan a business and buy expensive pieces of equipment that last for 20 to 30 years, when you have total uncertainty about the cost of your business expense."

There are three alternative sources that are being looked into: plants like algae or jatropha; coal; and natural gas.

The three major jet engine makers-Pratt & Whitney, Rolls Royce and General Electric-are involved in these tests. Their aim is to develop a fuel mix that could be certified by aviation authorities as a "drop-in replacement," meaning that it will not require any changes in the engine or modifications to other parts of the plane nor to existing storage and delivery facilities of jet fuel.

This is supported by the International Air Transport Association (IATA). It set a target of 10-percent alternative-fuel use by 2017.

The main uncertainty is price. Unless the biofuel market becomes large enough, the price of the substitutes will be determined by the value of the fuels that they replace. This means that biofuels have to become dominant as a transportation fuel for their price to become predictable.

So far, the volumes are small.

Brazil is marketing a light plane that flies on ethanol. But since this fuel is corrosive and exudes water, extensive modification on aircraft that are not purpose-built would be needed.

Jatropha has the biggest potential because it's being positioned as a biodiesel. Large areas in tropical countries have already been planted to this shrub whose fruit contains an oil-bearing seed.

But algae is the better fuel source. For one, it's carbon neutral as it actually devours carbon dioxide (CO2) to grow. For another, it does not displace agriculture because it can be grown in pools of water. But best of all, it's as energy-dense as kerosene, easy to transport, and relatively cheap. Experiments show that algae can be processed to become identical to gasoline.

A company in South Africa, Sasol, has been producing for years a semi-synthetic blend of petroleum and coal that can be used as a jet fuel. It has been approved by the Ministry of Defense of the UK for use by its military aircraft, thus clearing the way for civilian planes.

A company in Qatar, using a technology similar to Sasol's, is now making a jet fuel substitute from natural gas.

How do these substitutes stack up environmentally?

Jatropha has only half as much CO2 as fuel from petroleum. Fuel from algae has virtually none. Both can pass the environmental standards of the European Union for aviation fuel.

Synfuels from coal have very low sulfur but when their production is taken into account, they generate more CO2 than jet fuel made directly from petroleum.

Jet fuel from natural gas has relatively little carbon content but its still emits a fair amount of greenhouse gases.

When the climate change meeting takes place in Copenhagen this year to negotiate the successor treaty to the Kyoto protocol, it will also establish the standards for greenhouse gas emissions. It's very likely that plant-based transportation fuel will become the fuel of choice.

Jatropha and algae could therefore become the energy crops in the near future until hydrogen becomes feasible and affordable.

(Source: opinion@manilatimes.net)