PINA

The minister in charge of next month’s crunch Glasgow climate summit has challenged Australia to nearly double its 2030 emissions reduction target and urged Prime Minister Scott Morrison to attend the talks in person.

Alok Sharma, the president of the United Nations Climate Change Conference, framed Morrison’s participation as a test of Australia’s friendship with Britain, warning the ravages of global warming cannot be avoided unless world leaders make Glasgow their top priority.

“I would dearly love the Australian Prime Minister to come,” Sharma said in an interview with The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age.

“I can understand that every leader will have to take into account what is going on domestically but COP26 really matters and we want to see as many world leaders as possible.

“You’re some of our closest mates in the world, and we need you by our side to demonstrate the unity of purpose that is going to be really essential at this summit.”

Sharma, a cabinet minister who was elevated to the COP26 presidency by British Prime Minister Boris Johnson earlier this year, has been rallying support for a new pact that would bind the world to deeper emissions cuts, a faster phase-out of coal and more cash for poorer nations.

Morrison has not decided whether to fly to Glasgow but is preparing to take to cabinet and backbench MPs a formal policy of net-zero emissions by 2050. He is also under pressure to lift Australia’s existing goal of cutting pollution by 26 to 28 per cent by 2030, although that will be much harder to find agreement on.

Warning the world was at a “critical juncture”, Sharma said embracing net zero by 2050 was not enough. He cited the UK’s goal of slashing dangerous carbon emissions by at least 68 percent by 2030 and Japan’s promise of a 46 to 50 percent cut.

“Australia is a major world economy,” Sharma said. “And if you compare to where other major world economies are, I hope that we could get to 45 to 50 percent from Australia.

“That would mean they’d be comparable with other major economies in the world.”

Labour took a 45 percent target by 2030 to the 2019 federal election – a policy the government claimed would take a “wrecking ball” to the economy. Opposition Leader Anthony Albanese has since called Labor’s pledge “a mistake”.

But the NSW Liberal government last week promised to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 50 percent by 2030, building on the same policy unveiled by the Victorian Labour government earlier this year.

Sharma said he has had candid conversations with the Australian government over the need to make much deeper cuts before the end of the decade.

“I say to them basically what I say to everyone, which is that we need to do more. If we want to ensure that we are at a point of net zero by the middle of the century, then we have to have ambitious 2030 emission-reduction targets which align with that goal.”

A report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in August found a 45 percent cut by 2030 was essential to meeting the Paris Agreement’s goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees. “But on the current trajectory, we will see an increase of 16 percent in emissions by 2030 rather than a reduction,” Sharma said.

A spokesperson for the Prime Minister said Australia would take part in the COP26 summit and had a strong record of “meeting and beating” its emissions reduction commitments.

“We are working closely with the UK on the technology advances that will be needed for the world to transition to a net zero economy. Technology not taxes is the way to tackle climate change, keep the lights on and keep people in jobs. This will continue to be at the heart of Australia’s response.”

The government has promised to release an updated 2030 projection and its long-term strategy ahead of the Glasgow meeting.

The more ambitious action from NSW and Victoria could help the government lift its 2030 target of a 26 to 28 percent cut to something approaching 35 percent, but the politics within the Coalition is fraught and most cabinet ministers still do not know what Morrison is planning just three weeks out from the Glasgow summit.

Sharma said the urgency of the climate crisis warranted bold decisions from Australia.

“Australia is a great friend, and I really want one of my closest mates to come to my party and I want them to sing the same songs,” he said.

“And that in a climate context means more ambition on cutting emissions and it means more support in terms of financing for developing countries.”

Asked whether it was possible to achieve net-zero emissions without a price on carbon – which Morrison and Albanese are opposed to – Sharma stressed the international landscape was shifting rapidly.

“I mean, even China now has an emissions trading scheme,” he said.

“It is internationally acknowledged that countries are going to have to domestically and internationally address the whole issue of carbon pricing and carbon leakage – every country will have to get there.

“And so my advice to any country is to start to think about this now.”

Sharma also thanked the Morrison government and Energy and Emissions Reduction Minister Angus Taylor for assisting Pacific islands attendees with travel to the Glasgow event.

More than 20,000 people are expected to arrive in the Scottish city during the first two weeks of November.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson has made climate change a key plank of his leadership.

Johnson recently said the gathering would be held “in the full glare of the global spotlight”.

“And when the summit ends, when most of the world has committed to decisive, game-changing action, it will be clear to all which of us has lacked the courage to step up,” he said.

“The world will see, and your people will remember, and history will judge,” he said.

SOURCE: SMH/PACNEWS

Analysis of the total carbon dioxide emissions of countries since 1850 has revealed the nations with the greatest historical responsibility for the climate emergency. But six of the top 10 have yet to make ambitious new pledges to cut their emissions before the crucial UN COP26 climate summit in Glasgow in November.

The six include China, Russia and Brazil, which come only behind the U.S as the biggest cumulative polluters. The UK is eighth and Canada is 10th. Carbon dioxide remains in the atmosphere for centuries and the cumulative amount of CO2 emitted is closely linked to the 1.2C of heating the world has already seen.

At the UN negotiations, historical emissions underpin the claims for climate justice made by developing nations, along with the disparity in wealth of nations. Countries that grew rich on fossil fuels have the greatest responsibility to act, developing nations say, and to provide funding for low-CO2 development and protection against the impacts of global heating.

The UK is hosting Cop26 and the prime minister, Boris Johnson, acknowledged this responsibility in a speech to the UN in September.

The analysis, produced by Carbon Brief, includes, for the first time, emissions from the destruction of forests and other changes in land use alongside fossil fuels and cement production. This pushes Brazil and Indonesia into the top 10, unlike when fossil fuel emissions alone are considered.

The data also shows the world has now used 85 percent of the CO2 budget that would give a 50 percent chance of limiting heating to 1.5C, the danger limit agreed in Paris in 2015.

The U.S, Germany, Britain and Canada are the only top 10 nations to have made pledges of deeper emissions cuts in advance of Cop26. While the U.S has said it will double its climate finance contribution to developing nations, some still see this as too little from the world’s biggest economy.

Russia has made a new pledge, but it allows for emissions to rise, and the Climate Action Tracker (Cat) group classes it as “critically insufficient” compared with the Paris targets. China and India have yet to make any new pledges, while those of Brazil, Indonesia and Japan do not improve on previous pledges.

“There’s a direct link between the 2,500bn tonnes of CO2 pumped into the atmosphere since 1850 and the 1.2C of warming we’re already experiencing,” said Simon Evans at Carbon Brief. “Our new analysis puts a vital spotlight on the people and countries most responsible for heating our planet.

“We can’t ignore CO2 from forestry and land use change, because it makes up nearly a third of the cumulative total since 1850. Once you include that, it’s really striking to see Brazil and Indonesia vaulting into the top 10.”

Mohamed Nasheed, ambassador for the Climate Vulnerable Forum (CVF), a group of 48 nations, and the speaker of parliament in the Maldives, said: “Basic justice demands that those who have done most to cause the climate emergency should take the lead in addressing it. This new analysis makes clear where responsibility lies: principally with the US, but also latterly with China and Russia.

“The historical emitters have taken up all the carbon budget for 1.5C and spent it on their own development. In that sense we have lent them our carbon budget and they owe us for it. Coming up to the COP26 we have seen some increased pledges for finance, but it is still far below the US$100bn a year the CVF is calling for.”

Tom Athanasiou, a partner in the Climate Equity Reference Project, said the differing capacity of rich and poor nations to fund climate action was important. “Historical responsibility is a keystone equity principle, but it’s not the only one,” he said. “Considering capacity is essential if we’re to keep climate action from happening on the backs of the poor.”

The Carbon Brief analysis shows that about 85 percent of the cumulative emissions of the US and China are from fossil fuel burning, and 15 percent from deforestation, with the reverse true for Brazil and Indonesia. Indonesia has made some progress in halting the razing of trees, but the felling of forests in Brazil has accelerated under the current president, Jair Bolsonaro.

The inclusion of deforestation emissions pushes Australia up from 16th to 13th place – Australia is thought to have cleared nearly half of its forest cover in the last 200 years. Australia’s emissions-cutting pledge for Cop26 does not increase its ambition and is rated “highly insufficient” by Cat.

The U.S has been the biggest cumulative polluter from 1850 all the way to the present day. Russia was the second biggest polluter until 2007, when its emissions were surpassed by China’s, whose emissions started rising rapidly from the 1970s. The UK was the third biggest emitter for a century, from 1870 until 1970, when it was overtaken by Brazil.

“We started the industrial revolution in Britain. We were the first to send the great puffs of acrid smoke to the heavens on a scale to derange the natural order,” Johnson told the UN general assembly in September. “We understand when the developing world looks to us to help them and we take our responsibilities.”

The COP26 president, Alok Sharma, said: “Big emitters, especially those in the G20, have a responsibility to send a strong and powerful message to the world that they are raising ambition and accelerating action on climate change. While those who have contributed most to the problem of global heating should take the lead, there is a role for all countries and parts of society in rising to this shared challenge.”

Robbie Andrew at Cicero, a Norwegian climate research centre, said: “While historical emissions are very important, almost two-thirds of our emissions of fossil CO2 have come since about 1980, and about 40 percent since 2000 [and] it’s what’s happening now that we can do something about.”

Last week, the UN secretary general, António Guterres, said developed economies needed to take the lead and Greta Thunberg raised the issue of historical responsibility as well.

“I recognise that the countries who have emitted the most carbon [dioxide] did not do so with the intention of harming the climate,” Nasheed said. “The internal combustion engine was invented for mobility, not to drown island nations. So I call for a collective approach to this, where we act together to rapidly scale up the clean technologies that we need instead of playing a postcolonial blame game.”

The Carbon Brief analysis used data from the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Centre, Our World in Data, Global Carbon Project, Carbon Monitor and studies on emissions from deforestation and changes in land use. It starts in 1850, before which reliable data is scarce, and so does not include emissions from the deforestation that occurred before that time. It accounted for changing national boundaries over time but did not ascribe the emissions from previously colonised countries to the colonising nation.

SOURCE: THE GUARDIAN/PACNEWS

An array of organisations aiming to host events at November’s UN climate conference in Glasgow have raised concerns about delays and the unusually high cost of building pavilions at this year’s COP26 summit.

Seven environmental and governmental groups told the Financial Times they were taken aback by the large sums quoted for the construction of pavilions, as labour and materials shortages delay planning and drive up prices.

One leading scientific organisation said it was quoted almost £500,000(US$679,000) in total to rent the space, for the structure to be built, and to pay for key items such as furniture and audiovisual equipment.

This year’s ground rent was about 30 percent higher per square metre than in Madrid in 2019, according to a UN official. Construction and materials costs were also higher than usual due to supply shortages, the official added.

The resulting delays have prompted questions about whether construction will be completed in time for the UK-hosted summit, which is less than four weeks away.

WWF, the charity, said that although annual pavilion costs varied, “this year we have noted that there has been a more significant increase than we have previously seen”.

The charity added that the conference was important for influencing policymakers and it was “vital” that all countries as well as civil society groups were represented.

Countries, scientific groups and non-profit organisations that attend COP conferences often commission the temporary structures, where they host educational events, meetings and parties. This year’s are to be built in the Scottish Event Campus centre by Orientations Events, based in Glasgow and Hamburg.

“From the outset, Orientations said ‘try not to use too many walls because it’s going to be really expensive’,” said Michael Funch, project manager for the Nordic Council of Ministers’ pavilion. “They knew there would be supply crunches.”

Total costs for the group’s roughly 100 square metre structure will amount to about £150,000(US$203,000), or about a third more than for those at the last COP in Madrid.

“It’s really hard for anyone who doesn’t have at least over £100,000(US$135,000) to be able to build a pavilion and secure that kind of representation,” said Funch.

Although some groups are recycling parts of their pavilions from previous years, many are not able to do so. All pavilion hosts must rent the ground space and also pay for construction.

One prominent scientific group that was quoted £500,000(US$679,000) for its pavilion has decided — at short notice — to significantly scale back its plans.

A further two organisations said they were still waiting for delayed quotes for the costs of their pavilions. A fourth, a non-profit group, said Orientations had proposed that it also pay for the cost of local accommodation for the workers.

Demand for pavilions at this year’s COP is especially high, though their construction cannot begin until mid-October when the event space becomes accessible.

One popular fixture of the COP conference in recent years has been the Pacific pavilion, which often features music and dance from the Pacific Islands, as well as talks and panel discussions.

However, at Glasgow the Pacific Islands will not have a pavilion of their own but a “space” that can only seat about 20 people, compared with seating for about 100 in a normal year.

“It is smaller, much smaller,” said Tagaloa Cooper-Halo, director of climate change resilience at the Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP). “It is pretty much the same cost as a much larger space in Madrid.”

Orientations declined to comment. A COP26 spokesperson said organisers were confident all the pavilions would be ready in time. “There has been unprecedented demand for pavilions at COP26 and the impact of Covid on the supply of essential goods and materials has increased cost.”

The UK government has funded some pavilions, including those for the Indigenous Peoples Forum on Climate Change and the Alliance of Small Island States, but said it was not able to support all requests.

SOURCE: FINANCIAL TIMES/PACNEWS