Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Environment

Still In Denial About Global Warming

By Sunny Lewis, AlterNet. Posted June 20, 2005.


The Bush Administration’s fingerprints are all over a draft of an international plan to combat climate change.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

The G8 plan to combat climate change has been "watered down" to satisfy the United States, an environmental group said last week after viewing a leaked draft prepared in advance of next month's G8 Summit at the Gleneagles Hotel in Scotland.

Friends of the Earth reacted "with anger" at the content of the draft communique on climate change entitled "Gleneagles Plan of Action," and dated June 14.

Compared to an earlier draft leaked on May 2, which itself had no specific targets or timetables for action, this version appears to be even weaker.

The latest draft "worryingly even calls into question scientists' warnings that global climate change is already under way," Friends of the Earth said.

On June 7, the national science academies of all the G8 countries -- Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States -- plus the three largest developing countries, Brazil, China and India, issued joint statement declaring "there is now strong evidence that significant global warming is occurring."

"It is likely that most of the warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities," the scientific academies said, adding, "The scientific understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to justify nations taking prompt action."

Friends of the Earth International's climate campaigner Catherine Pearce said, "Every reference to the urgency of action or the need for real cuts in emissions has been deleted or challenged. Nothing in this text recognizes the scale or urgency of the crisis of climate change."

G8 Summit host, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, has vowed to put action to limit climate change at the top of the G8 agenda, but with just 17 days to go before the leaders of the world's eight wealthiest nations meet at the Gleneagles Hotel, it appears that the draft action plan is being weakened so that little action will result.

Enclosed in square brackets, which mean that unanimous agreement has not been reached, are the statements, "[Our world is warming.]" and "[The statement issued by the science academies in June 2005 said that there is now 'strong evidence that significant global warming is occurring' and that 'this warming has already led to changes in the Earth's climate.]"

Other bracketed statements include, "[The world's developed economies have a responsibility to show leadership.]" and the phrase "[and reduce greenhouse gas emissions]"

"[Those of us who have ratified the Kyoto Protocol welcome its entry into force and will work to make it a success.]" was enclosed in brackets.

Also bracketed was a much longer statement about the Kyoto Protocol that would strengthen its greenhouse gas emissions trading system and flexible market mechanisms that facilitate investment in carbon neutral projects.

The environmentalists believe the changes were made at the insistence of the Bush administration, which has declined to ratify the Kyoto Protocol, although the United States signed the accord under the Clinton administration.

All of the other G8 nations have ratified the protocol that requires an average 5.2 percent reduction in greenhouse gases by 2012.

After listening to U.S. chief climate negotiator Harlan Watson speaking on the BBC's Today Programme on May 13, Pearce said, "The G8 meeting provides an unprecedented opportunity for the richest nations to address the biggest threat facing our planet, but this opportunity will be missed due to the disgraceful, outdated and downright dangerous behavior of the U.S."

In the "Gleneagles Plan of Action," square brackets were also inserted into a commitment to work with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPPC) to provide an assessment of the climate impact of aviation.

The words [the IPCC] are bracketed, indicating less than unanimous agreement to work with the panel of more than 2,500 scientists established by the World Meteorological Organization and the UN Environment Programme to assess scientific, technical and socio-economic information about climate change, its potential impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation.

At a minimum Friends of the Earth says the G8 must state "agreement on the compelling scientific evidence showing that climate change is already happening and that urgent action is now required to substantially reduce emissions."

The group urges an agreement by G8 nations for "specific, substantial and timetabled cuts in their domestic emissions of greenhouse gases."

"If they can't do better than this," said Pearce, "the outcome of G8 summit will be worse that hot air -- it will be a backward step in international climate change policy, simply adding to climate injustice."

Also bracketed is a a proposal to launch "[a Global Bioenergy Partnership to support wider cost effective biomass and biofuels deployment, particularly in developing countries where biomass use is prevalent...]"

Friends of the Earth Scotland's Chief Executive Duncan McLaren, said, "Any suggestion that G8's visit to Scotland would produce anything meaningful on tackling climate change is rapidly evaporating."

"The first draft of this document was bad, this update is even worse," said McLaren.

All reference to funding for climate change research was deleted from the latest version of the communique.

"G8 countries represent just 13 per cent of the world's population, but account for 45 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions," McLaren said. "A climate plan of action, by the world's richest nations that does not include targets, timetables and extra funding is of no use to future climate victims."

Speaking to Channel 4 News former British Environment Minister Michael Meacher said it is "extraordinary" that doubt is being cast on the simple assertion that the world is getting warmer. "Presumably it was taken out because of the Americans," he said.

Other British officials said there are drafts and drafts in the days before any international summit, and the only draft that matters is the one signed at Gleneagles.

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

Sunny Lewis is editor-in-chief of Environment News Service, an independently owned, real-time wire service covering the environment.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Environment! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Scientific Honesty & Global Warming
Posted by: NoPCZone on Jun 20, 2005 10:47 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One of the oldest sayings in statistics is that your results are only as good as your data. In the computer age that has been morphed into 'garbage in-- garbage out'. Why make that quote? Even though I am a strong environmentalist, I have yet to be convinced of the certainty of the Global Warming lobby.

There is no doubt that our planet is going through a warming phase as it has previously. The question I raise is not a dispute that the planet is warming, but how sure are we that human activity is the cause? Before we remake the world's economy by re-ordering it's use of energy, we should be sure that the numbers add up.

The database of reliable and detailed weather data on a global scale is VERY THIN on a time-scale compared to that of the earth. The atmosphere is a very complex and large data set, the ocean is as well and the interaction between the two is still being figured out. Add in other variables such as volcanic activity, variable solar output and the complexity of climate modeling is staggering. Given the very thin database available to science, I find the surety of their posits bordering on arrogant.

I am aware of ice cores and other 'alternative' data. They bear about as much resemblance to modern weather data as 'Classic Comics' does to the original Shakespeare. I'm not discounting the work of the Climatologists- just casting a critical eye on the conjecture with which they place so much confidence. When people extrapolate data to this extent on such a complex and dynamic thing as climate, I doubt that they can be very accurate.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Damn right it will! Posted by: NoPCZone
» RE: Damn right it will! Posted by: Samantha Vimes
» Thank you for the rebuttals Posted by: Sojourner
» RE: Thank you for the rebuttals Posted by: Samantha Vimes
global warming
Posted by: esbuck on Jun 21, 2005 12:21 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Unfortunately, science is confused with politics, and hidden agendas dictate what is PC, regardless of the facts. As a former practicing meteorologist, I would like to make some points.

1. Yes, the climate is changing. It is almost always changing. It was warmer a thousand years ago (at least in the northern hemisphere) than it is now, and warmer still 8000 years ago. We are coming out of a "little ice age". One needn't go all Chicken Little about it, unless one is a climatologist in search of a government grant. Yes, some glaciers are retreating, and under the ice we find trees! Clearly, it used to be warmer there than it is now. Most likely, when Hannibal crossed the Alps with his elephants, they did not have to negotiate much ice and snow. Of course, there were no ski resorts then, either.

2. The assertion that climate change is the result of human activity is only partly true. The local climate in Florida changed when they drained Florida and paved it over; same thing for Manhattan. However, can we blame Exxon for the lack of pack ice when Icelanders settled Greenland a thousand years ago? Has the observed warming trend on Mars been caused by non-ratification of the Kyoto treaty by the Marian senate?

3. The greenhouse effect is real, but carbon dioxide is a very minor player. Water vapor and the resulting clouds and rain completely overwhelm the effect of carbon dioxide. Unfortunately for "progressive" activists, most of the water vapor comes from evaporation of oceans, international waters, and their lust for regulation is frustrated by lack of jurisdiction. Further, the computer climate models are unable to handle water and clouds, so they ignore water and exaggerate carbon dioxide. Gargage in: garbage out still applies to computer models. Even if we believe the "evidence" (it's all computer simulations, not actual observation of the real world) that carbon dioxide is the culprit, the Kyoto treaty would put off global disaster by only a few months. Why not spend those $billions on enjoying life before we are snuffed out, anyway?

I am not going to assert that King George has even average intelligence, and I seriously doubt that his influence on energy policy owes much to good science, but I agree with those who say, "Wait a minute. Let's not jump to conclusions."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: global warming Posted by: Rd232
Its Good To See A Site Where All Folks Are Not Lemmings
Posted by: cannuck on Jun 23, 2005 7:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Glad to see a variety of viewpoints on whether or not this planet is getting abnormally warmer (or colder) and whether we little ants running around on the surface of this planet is the cause (rather than the universe around us).

The fact is that for 98% of this planet's life - it has been frozen over - with only a couple of periods in defrost. The last warm period finished in about 1200 AD - when palm trees grew used to be all over England. When the temperatures plummeted -Europeans denuded it's forests to keep warm.

So maybe we should be enjoying this warming period - while it lasts - if it comes. But lets stop pretending that we are the cause. There is no scientific proof that we cause global warming - notice scientific proof. The garbage that keeps getting reported by the media is not science - whether it is the status quo media or the so-called alternative media. "A lie repeated a thousand times doesn't become the truth" - Ghandi.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Could a different kind of action bring both sides together?
Posted by: Samantha Vimes on Jun 24, 2005 3:26 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm seeing an arguement here that amounts to:
The Earth is warming, and it's caused by man.
or
The Earth is warming naturally.

Why aren't we setting aside why and getting down to what to do? We need to have an *argicultural* plan. Because WHAT grows best WHERE will change. Some areas will be wetter, some drier, some lost to rise in water level. We should be putting our money into making sure future generations will survive by adopting smart irrigationpractices, building storm resistant homes, and developing energy sources such as wind farms that will keep us in energy post peak oil.
Saying we need do nothing because we didn't cause the situation is ridiculous. And prevention, at this point, is late... climate changes will continue to occur for decades, if we *are* the cause.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Asteroid analogy
Posted by: Rd232 on Jul 21, 2005 5:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So there's this asteroid coming towards us; the size of the one that helped wipe out the dinosaurs. NASA says it's probably going to hit us, unless we do something about it. The Russians and the Chinese and the Europeans agree. There are some disagreements about details, but just about every professional active in the field agrees. A few don't, and a bunch of amateurs don't, and a bunch of politicians and journalists conclude that we should wait until "probably" becomes "definitely" and the last dissenter has gone to camp outside Area 51. NASA's protestations that the longer we wait, the more difficult and expensive it will be to deflect the asteroid, and that there's a point of no return which we're not quite sure when it is, is to no avail. Denial wins. Easter Island, eat your heart out.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

US is supreme culprit
Posted by: Da African on Aug 24, 2005 9:23 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As long as the US uses the most of the world's natural resources and pollutes more than any of the industrialized nations, then the earth is plowing towards destruction.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement