CCNet

Faculty of Science, Liverpool John Moores University Tel:- +44 (0)151 231 4338 b.j.peiser@ljmu.ac.uk

CCNet 54/06 – 29 March 2006

BRITAIN DECLARES KYOTO A “DEAD-END STREET”

TONY BLAIR was accused last night of caving in to American pressure by proposing a watered-down replacement for the Kyoto Protocol that relies on new technology rather than binding greenhouse gas cuts as the solution to climate change. Mr Blair’s proposal … is intended to break the international stalemate over the Kyoto Protocol, which sets targets for emissions reductions by rich countries but is repudiated by the US. A source close to the Prime Minister said it was now clear that Kyoto was a “dead-end street”, as it has developed into a religion that countries stand implacably for or against.

----The Times, 29 March 2006

Countries are going to be very worried about external targets being imposed on their economic growth.

--Tony Blair, The Australian, 29 March 2006

AUSTRALIA has held talks with Tony Blair on forging a post-Kyoto accord to cut carbon emissions, with the British Prime Minister calling for a "real dose of realism" in the debate over greenhouse gases. John Howard and senior government ministers yesterday discussed with Mr Blair a possible climate strategy involving the world's 20 biggest carbon emitters, including China, India, Australia, the US and Britain. Mr Howard signalled he was keen to explore options, suggesting the recently formed Asia- Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate as a bridge to get other nations "into the tent".

--The Australian, 29 March 2006

Britain's credibility as a leader in the fight against climate change has suffered a massive blow with the Government being forced to announce it will not meet its flagship target for cutting the carbon dioxide emissions causing global warming. The target, to cut UK CO2 emissions from industry and transport to 20 per cent below their 1990 levels by 2010, will be missed by a wide margin, even after an intensive, year-long review of all the measures in the Government's climate change programme, designed to bring it within reach.

--Michael McCarthy, The Independent, 29 March 2006

(1) BRITAIN DECLARES KYOTO A “DEAD-END STREET”

Philip Webster, Mark Henderson and Lewis Smith, The Times, 29 March 2006

(2) POST-KYOTO: BRITAIN MIGHT JOIN ASIA-PACIFIC CLIMATE PACT

Steve Lewis and Patrick Walters, The Australian, 29 March 2006

(3) BRITAIN ENDORSES ASIA-PACIFIC CLIMATE PACT

Reuters, 28 March 2006

(4) GOVERNMENT ACCUSED OF PITIFUL FAILURE TO MEET GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSION TARGET

David Adam and Terry Macalister, The Guardian, 29 March 2006

(5) BLOW FOR BRITAIN'S FIGHT AGAINST CLIMATE CHANGE AS EMISSIONS TARGET IS MISSED

Michael McCarthy, The Independent, 29 March 2006

(6) UK MISSES ITS OWN CLIMATE CHANGE TARGETS - WHAT NEXT?

PR Newswire, 28 March 2006

(7) IRELAND’S GAS EMISSIONS UP 130% IN 10 YEARS

Irish Examiner, 28 March 2006

(8) GLOBAL STRUGGLE TO MEET KYOTO COMMITMENTS

Fiona Harvey, Financial Times, 29 March 2006

(9) HIGHLY OVER-HYPED: GREENLAND'S AND ANTARCTICA'S IMPACTS ON SEA LEVEL

CO2 Science Magazine, 29 March 2006

(10) TRENDS OF 20TH-CENTURY RIVER FLOW

CO2 Science Magazine, 29 March 2006

(11) AND FINALLY: CLIMATE CHANGE: THE RICE GENOME TO THE RESCUE

Eurekalert, 27 March 2006

(1) BRITAIN DECLARES KYOTO A “DEAD-END STREET”

The Times, 29 March 2006

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2109052,00.html

By Philip Webster in Auckland, Mark Henderson and Lewis Smith

The Prime Minister will call today for a new international goal of stabilising temperatures and carbon emissions at present levels when the Kyoto agreement expires in 2012, to be achieved primarily by investment in cleaner energy technologies.

Though the plan will be presented as a way of resolving deadlock over the best way to tackle global warming, it was attacked by environmental groups as a toothless sop to the Bush Administration that would fail unless backed by rigorous

targets.

“In attempting to try to bring Bush on board he’s moving so far that we might end up without a coherent framework,” Mike Childs, of Friends of the Earth, said. “The trouble with saying we need new technology without having targets is that the business community won’t invest. It will keep its money in coal, oil and gas.”

Mr Blair’s proposal, which comes as the Government admitted that it would miss its pledge to reduce carbon dioxide output by 20 per cent of 1990 levels by 2010, will be laid out in a speech to a climate change conference in Wellington, the New Zealand capital.

It is intended to break the international stalemate over the Kyoto Protocol, which sets targets for emissions reductions by rich countries but is repudiated by the US.

A source close to the Prime Minister said it was now clear that Kyoto was a “dead-end street”, as it has developed into a religion that countries stand implacably for or against.

Sir David King, Mr Blair’s influential Chief Scientific Adviser, has argued that the world should seek to stabilise atmospheric carbon dioxide at 550 parts per million (ppm) by 2050, which he says is an achievable target that would limit the worst impacts of global warming. This goal, however, has been criticised as insufficient by green groups, who point to research suggesting that a maximum level of 400-450 ppm would be needed to confine climate change to 2C (3.6F) of warming.

Mr Blair has accepted that the US will not sign up to a “son of Kyoto” agreement that involves concrete reductions in carbon dioxide emissions, and fears that a failure to agree a new climate pact would be a disaster for the planet.

Peter Ainsworth, the Shadow Environment Secretary, described the new initiative as appalling. He said: “He’s taking his cue from George W. Bush. One has a sense of towels being thrown in all over the place.”

Michael Roberts, of the CBI, said: “Tony Blair is right to say that technology is important to tackling climate change — but firm international commitments to cut carbon emissions will also help to drive technological change.”

American objections to Kyoto stem from concern about the security of its energy supplies, and the damage that binding carbon emissions cuts might cause to its economy. It has said it will not sign up when two of the world’s largest polluters — China and India — are not part of the process.

Chris Huhne, the Liberal Democrat environment spokesman, said: “It’s very regrettable that the Prime Minister is cooling on targets. Technology is not a substitute for having a clear framework.”

(2) POST-KYOTO: BRITAIN MIGHT JOIN ASIA-PACIFIC CLIMATE PACT

The Australian, 29 March 2006

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,18639689%255E2702,00.html

Steve Lewis and Patrick Walters

John Howard and senior government ministers yesterday discussed with Mr Blair a possible climate strategy involving the world's 20 biggest carbon emitters, including China, India, Australia, the US and Britain.

Mr Howard signalled he was keen to explore options, suggesting the recently formed Asia- Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate as a bridge to get other nations "into the tent".

Australia and the US are among a few countries that have not ratified the Kyoto Protocol, amid concerns the regime will unfairly penalise developed economies that rely strongly on fossil fuels as an energy source.

Mr Blair, who has championed a global push to cut greenhouse gases, described the Asia-Pacific framework, dubbed AP6, as a "very important positive sign". It comprises Australia, the US, China, India, Japan and South Korea.

Climate change was one of a number of issues discussed as Mr Blair met cabinet ministers in Canberra yesterday.

It is understood Mr Blair and government MPs discussed the need for progress on climate change, with the British leader later accepting that countries such as Australia were reluctant to embrace the Kyoto targets.

"Countries are going to be very worried about external targets being imposed on their economic growth," Mr Blair told reporters.

Instead, Australia is hoping the AP6 framework will emerge as a serious group that can lead to the introduction of cleaner energy technologies to cut greenhouse emissions.

A group of about 45 Australian representatives, mainly from industry, will travel to the US next month to discuss ways to spend hundreds of millions of dollars offered by governments.

But there is a recognition that more will have to be done to combat the rising levels of carbon emissions.

Mr Blair's discussion yesterday revolved around a group of about 20 countries - including the six AP6 members - that could drive global reform.

Mr Blair said there was need for a new framework "that allows us to move forward in a disciplined way". "But I think the fact that you've got these initiatives at the moment, all tending in the same direction, is actually a positive sign."

The British leader, who flew to New Zealand yesterday after his four-day visit to Australia, also met Kim Beazley in Canberra. The two leaders, who have been friends for about 30 years, held a private 15-minute discussion at Canberra's Hyatt Hotel.

Talk about Iraq, on which the two leaders strongly disagree, was only brief. More common ground was reached on other policy issues, as they were joined by Labor deputy leader Jenny Macklin and foreign affairs spokesman Kevin Rudd.

Issues discussed included Iran's expanding nuclear capability, education and skills.

(3) BRITAIN ENDORSES ASIA-PACIFIC CLIMATE PACT

Reuters, 28 March 2006

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/SYD317580.htm

CANBERRA, March 28 (Reuters) - British Prime Minister Tony Blair on Tuesday backed an Asia-Pacific climate partnership that includes India, China and the United States, saying it was not aimed at undermining the Kyoto protocol on cutting gas emissions.

Blair said there were a number of climate-change initiatives around the world which could eventually be brought together to tackle greenhouse gas emissions globally, and encourage business to adopt greener technology and energy.

"I think the fact that you've got these initiatives at the moment, all tending in the same direction, is actually a positive sign, it's not a negative one. We don't see that as aimed at us in any shape or form," he told reporters in Canberra.

In January Australia hosted the first meeting of the Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate, which groups six of the world's biggest polluters: China, India, the United States, Australia, Japan and South Korea.

Australia and the United States have not signed up to the Kyoto emissions targets, saying the targets would threaten economic growth and would be worthless without the involvement of major developing countries such as China and India.

The Asia-Pacific climate partnership looks at how to develop technologies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions rather than having specific targets.

Blair's comments come ahead of the release of Britain's long-awaited Climate Change Review, which aims to set self-imposed 20 percent cuts in carbon dioxide emissions by 2010.

Under the Kyoto Protocol, Britain is pledged to cutting carbon dioxide emissions by 12.5 percent by 2012.

Blair, who held talks with Australian Prime Minister John Howard on Tuesday, said he believed the Asia-Pacific climate partnership was a positive development.

"Britain is not going to be the country whose future determines the future of the planet and the climate," he told a joint news conference with Howard.

"It's going to be about China, India and America, as well as of course the Europeans, and Japan and other countries like Australia.

"It is a completely unrealistic debate to say that you can have a climate-change agreement that doesn't involve China, and then America obviously, and then India, which is also a country of a billion people growing at a fast rate."

(4) GOVERNMENT ACCUSED OF PITIFUL FAILURE TO MEET GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSION TARGET

The Guardian, 29 March 2006

http://www.guardian.co.uk/frontpage/story/0,,1741894,00.html

• Minister admits pledge on cutting C02 will not be met

• Call for national effort to help achieve goals

David Adam and Terry Macalister

Scientists, environmental campaigners and opposition politicians yesterday issued a scathing response to the government's admission that it will fail to meet a key target to cut greenhouse gas pollution. They called the results of an 18-month review of climate change policies "pitiful" and accused ministers of lacking the political will to tackle global warming.

Margaret Beckett, the environment secretary, confirmed that measures to reduce emissions are now projected to cut UK carbon dioxide pollution by 15%-18% below 1990 levels by 2010. The government had pledged to reduce it by 20%.

"I regret that we haven't identified just in this programme precisely the full range of measures that will get us to the 20%," she said. "But as we have all made clear, a great range of actions has been undertaken and there will be more. If ever there was a subject in which a government alone cannot deliver this is it."

She blamed recent rises in carbon emissions on economic growth and increased energy prices which forced power generators to switch from gas to more polluting coal. "We need a national effort to meet these goals and complement government action. People can look at their own behaviour and how they can support us."

Peter Ainsworth, the shadow environment secretary, said: "The review is a grim admission of failure on what was meant to be one of Mr Blair's top priorities. Worse still, it fails to chart a course which will get us back on track."

Charlie Kronick, a climate campaigner with Greenpeace, said: "This review is pitiful. CO2 emissions are rising, the target's getting further away and the government has introduced no new measures to combat this."

Bill Maguire, an expert in natural disasters at University College London, said: "The government talks a good game when it comes to climate change, but there is simply not enough action. We cannot get away any longer with preaching about the horrors of climate change to the rest of the world when we are not placing sufficient emphasis on tackling the problem at home." If aircraft and shipping are included, then UK emissions in 2005 were higher than in 1990.

The prime minister tried to regain the initiative last night by telling a climate change conference in New Zealand that he would push for a new international framework to replace the Kyoto protocol when it expires at the end of 2012. Tony Blair's spokesman said the prime minister - who was addressing the climate change conference in Wellington by videolink - would be mounting a push for a new comprehensive international agreement. He said Mr Blair wanted to use this summer's G8 summit in St Petersburg to bring in countries such as the US, China and India, which did not sign up to Kyoto.

The review lists a series of measures aimed at saving an additional 7m-12m tonnes of carbon by 2010. It includes schemes to reduce emissions through increased energy efficiency and burning biomass. It reveals that a dispute between government departments about pollution caps imposed on industry under a European emissions trading scheme has not been settled. The review estimates the carbon saving from the second phase of the scheme as between 3m and 8m tonnes, reflecting the conflicting views of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Department of Trade and Industry.

Ministers appear to have ruled out dozens of options proposed in a draft of the review passed to the Guardian last year,

which included a crackdown on motorway speeding, a mandatory UK emissions trading scheme and turning the clocks

forward an hour.

Some observers questioned whether even the lower projected savings detailed in the review are achievable. Lord Rees of Ludlow, president of the Royal Society, said: "The government appears to be pinning its hopes on measures that haven't delivered in the past."

The rising cost of steel has hit the construction of offshore wind turbines: only three of 18 sites that should have opened by the start of the year are operational. Figures from the Society of British Gas Industries show that fewer people than expected are switching to energy efficient condensing boilers. And the Renewable Energy Association says that a move to mix ethanol into petrol is threatened by weak penalties for companies that fail to comply.

Friends of the Earth said the lower cap suggested for the next phase of the European emissions trading scheme would allow industry to pollute even more. Tony Juniper, its director, said: "They've stretched this to the limits of credibility to get it as close as possible to 20%."

The government yesterday also outlined plans to increase local energy production and cut carbon emissions by encouraging householders, small businesses and even schools to use solar panels and small wind turbines to create their own "micropower" systems.

A further £50m was committed in the budget to help develop a low-carbon building programme and ministers promised to overcome barriers such as cost, information awareness and easy access to the national electricity grid.

Electricity suppliers are being encouraged to develop a scheme that would reward home generators that "export" excess electricity, while local planning laws will be reviewed to make sure new projects are encouraged.

"In days gone by we would fill our coal scuttle or collect wood for the fire, whereas now we would just flick on a switch and expect everything to work," the energy minister, Malcolm Wicks, will tell a power conference today. "This distance from energy source leads to waste, but by having microgeneration technologies present in our homes and buildings we reconnect with how much we're using - and abusing - and find ways of being more efficient with it."

The new strategy also includes a "route map" for developing solar and wind power and other types of technology.

(5) BLOW FOR BRITAIN'S FIGHT AGAINST CLIMATE CHANGE AS EMISSIONS TARGET IS MISSED

The Independent, 29 March 2006

http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/article354231.ece

By Michael McCarthy, Environment Editor

The target, to cut UK CO2 emissions from industry and transport to 20 per cent below their 1990 levels by 2010, will be missed by a wide margin, even after an intensive, year-long review of all the measures in the Government's climate change programme, designed to bring it within reach.

The announcement yesterday of the policy failure came on the day that MPs began an inquiry into a new way of fighting climate change, and Independent readers responded in their hundreds with their own ideas about how to tackle the greatest threat now facing human society. Today we publish a large selection of readers' comments, which will be forwarded to the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Climate Change, chaired by Colin Challen.

It was a distinctly unhappy Margaret Beckett, the Environment Secretary, who had to admit that the full set of revised policies, from energy efficiency to emissions trading, would now only deliver a CO2 cutback of from 15 to 18 per cent by the target date. If the result is at the lower end of the range, the policy review will have achieved virtually nothing, as it was set up in 2004 after the realisation that only a 14 per cent cutback was on the cards.

The Government had encouraged the belief that the review would make the 20 per cent figure attainable. The size of the failure stunned observers, as well as embarrassing ministers and eliciting contemptuous criticism from environmental groups and opposition parties.

There can be no more flagrant example in all of Labour's years in office of the gross miscarriage of a key policy. The 20 per cent CO2 target has been the headline Labour Party green pledge since 1994 and has been earnestly repeated in three successive manifestos as well as in the 2003 energy review.

Speaking in Auckland last night, Tony Blair called for a "technological revolution" to stabilise climate change and give companies the confidence to invest in the future of the planet. He said developing technology in the private sector was the key to tackling the problems of energy security and greenhouse gases facing world leaders.

Yesterday, Mrs Beckett was joined by other senior ministers to put as brave a face as they could on what is, in image terms, a catastrophe for a government that has striven to take an international lead on climate change, with Mr Blair giving it particular emphasis.

The Trade and Industry Secretary, Alan Johnson, the Transport Secretary, Alistair Darling, the Minister of Communities and Local Government, David Miliband, and the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, John Healey, all tried to present the revised climate change programme in a positive light, but they looked glum about it.

Friends of the Earth said the performance was "pathetic" and called for a new law to make the Government legally responsible for reducing UK CO2 emissions.

Greenpeace said that "even Arnold Schwarzenegger [the Governor of California] has more demanding carbon reduction targets than the UK". The World Wide Fund for Nature said Mr Blair's credibility over climate change was "in tatters".

Peter Ainsworth, the shadow Environment Secretary, said the review was " a grim admission of failure on what was meant to be one of Mr Blair's top priorities".

The Green MEP Caroline Lucas said the review "won't make the slightest difference to a government that likes to talk about tackling climate change whilst pursuing the very policies road-building, airport expansion and encouraging low-cost airlines and private transport that exacerbate it. "

Asked why the review had failed, Mrs Beckett said it had "turned out to be much more difficult to deliver the target than anybody had anticipated when it was set." She said: "Some of the measures have just not delivered as much as people thought."

Specifically, she blamed higher energy prices for the failure to control rising CO2 emissions the rise in the price of gas has meant that power generators have been switching to coal, which is more carbon-intensive.

She also blamed the unexpectedly strong growth of the economy. Yet this is the very point made in The Independent yesterday by Mr Challen, who contends that the pursuit of economic growth makes controlling CO2 an impossibility, and that a different path must be sought.

However, it is clear that there have also been fierce arguments behind the scenes between ministries representing different economic sectors, and that Mrs Beckett's Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, which took the lead on the review, has been stymied in its CO2-cutting ambitions by interests representing business.

The lesson that can be drawn from the spectacular failure to deliver the target is to realise how hard it is to cut carbon emissions by tinkering at the edges of a capitalist economy in full growth mode. It is now clear that the pursuit of economic business-as-usual is simply not an option, as Mr Challen strongly contends.

(6) UK MISSES ITS OWN CLIMATE CHANGE TARGETS - WHAT NEXT?

PR Newswire, 28 March 2006

http://www.pr-inside.com/u-k-misses-its-own-climate-change-targets-what-next-r2341.htm

BRUSSELS, Belgium, March 28 /PRNewswire/ -- As the U.K. today faces the reality that its official policy for fighting climate change has failed to deliver its own ambitious targets, it must acknowledge the harsh impact of cap and trade systems, which fail to protect the environment but instead have a damaging impact on energy prices, economic growth and jobs.

The UK Government today announced that its Climate Change Programme Review, on which it has spent more than a year, will not deliver its key global warming target to cut CO2 emissions to 20 per cent less than 1990 levels by 2010.

The International Council for Capital Formation (ICCF) urged U.K. policymakers to stop one-sided catering to environmental pressure groups and instead help to build practical, global solutions that will balance environmental goals with sound economic development.

"The high costs of compliance with a major pact like Kyoto are proving to be a heavy burden for industry and energy companies to bear," said ICCF Director Dr. Margo Thorning."If the U.K. stays this course consumers will ultimately pay the price in higher energy costs and lost jobs. In fact, indications are that the Emissions Trading Scheme is already raising UK energy prices."

A series of in-depth studies recently published by ICCF has analyzed the economic and energy implications of meeting emissions reductions defined under the Kyoto Protocol through an emissions trading regime in the United Kingdom, Italy, Spain and Germany.The studies show a significant rise in energy costs for consumers and businesses if the four countries meet their Kyoto emissions reduction targets in 2010 including:

* Increasing energy bills: An average increase in electricity prices of 26% and an average increase of 41% of natural gas prices by 2010 (across UK, Germany, Spain)

* Significant job losses: Job losses of at least 200,000 in each of Italy, Germany, UK and Spain to meet Kyoto targets by 2010 - rising to as many as 611,000 in Spain in 2010

* Damage to economy: A significant reduction in annual GDP below base case levels by 2010: 0.8% for Germany (18.5 billion Euros), 3.1% for Spain (26 billion Euros), 2.1% for Italy (27 billion Euros) and 1.1% for the UK (22 billion Euros).

These economic effects are already being felt throughout the European Union, as sentiments appear to be changing over cap and trade systems. Last September, mounting concerns over Kyoto led the UK Prime Minister, Tony Blair, whose own authority has been long waning, to state, "The truth is no country is going to cut its growth or consumption substantially in the light of a long term environmental problem. To be honest, I don't think people are going, at least in the short term, to start negotiating another major treaty like Kyoto."

ICCF noted that near-term emission reductions in developed countries should not take priority over maintaining strong economic growth and that the best course for the U.K. is to focus on the development of new, cost-effective technologies for alternative energy production and conservation while encouraging the spread of economic freedom and economic growth in the developing world.

"Energy use and economic growth go hand in hand," Thorning said. "The U.K. should reject mandatory programs, look to free market policies based on technology and reducing energy intensity, and work with developing countries on cleaner development - promoting improvements in their living standards while slowing their very rapid growth in greenhouse gas emissions."

SOURCE International Council for Capital Formation

Web Site: http://www.iccfglobal.org

(7) IRELAND’S GAS EMISSIONS UP 130% IN 10 YEARS

Irish Examiner, 28 March 2006

http://www.irishexaminer.com/pport/web/Full_Story/did-sgaciBogctyqUsgDQQ5wn3uAIg.asp

By Ann Cahill, Europe Correspondent

IRELAND’S greenhouse gas emissions from transport rose almost six times faster than the European average with more than a million extra cars on the country’s roads now.

Greenhouse gas emissions rose by 130% over a 10-year period in Ireland, compared to an EU average rise of 22%. The increase is in line with the country’s major economic growth over the last decade, but poses a huge challenge for meeting Kyoto targets and is a serious threat to health.

Fine Gael MEP Avril Doyle wants the Government to introduce bio-fuels fast as the best chance to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

A report from the European Environment Agency (EEA), to be launched today, shows that more goods and passengers are being transported farther and more often across Europe.

But the figures show that Ireland has raced ahead with a 160% increase in freight transport compared to the European average of 34%. .....

(8) GLOBAL STRUGGLE TO MEET KYOTO COMMITMENTS

Financial Times, 29 March 2006

http://news.ft.com/cms/s/52556592-bec0-11da-b10f-0000779e2340.html

By Fiona Harvey, Environment Correspondent

Governments around the world are struggling to meet their commitments under the Kyoto protocol on climate change, writes Fiona Harvey. However, even countries that have rejected the protocol, such as the US and Australia, or are not covered by its requirements - rapidly developing countries such as China and Brazil - are taking steps to reduce greenhouse gases

*US Energy efficiency and a diversification of energy sources have both become desirable independently of concerns over the climate owing to rising oil and gas prices and these are having a knock-on effect on greenhouse gas emissions. George W. Bush's new-found interest in biofuels - alternatives to petrol derived from plants - has spurred the take-up of ethanol, to the extent that the US will soon look ready to rival Brazil as a source of the fuel. Ethanol reduces greenhouse gas emissions because the plants from which it is made take up carbon dioxide from the atmosphere as they grow and it displaces fossil fuels. But US emissions continue to rise

*Europe: The UK is one of only three countries in the EU-15 that is expected to meet its targets under the Kyoto protocol. The other members of the European Union's greenhouse gas emissions trading scheme will rely to a large extent on second phase of the scheme, from 2008 to 2012, to help them meet their targets

*China: China has taken steps to reduce air pollution and greenhouse gases with its regulations on the fuel efficiency of vehicles. Use of wind power has also accelerated, thanks in large part to investment from overseas companies under the mechanisms of the Kyoto protocol, which allow developed countries to achieve greenhouse gas reduction targets by funding the development of low-carbon technologies in poorer countries. But unless it steps up its efforts China will become the biggest emitter within two decades

*Japan: Japan has been one of the keenest proponents of funding projects in developing countries under the Kyoto protocol, as reducing emissions at home has proved difficult to achieve while the government encourages manufacturing to boost the economy. However, it has introduced a broad range of measures to curb emissions

*Canada: The previous Canadian government was keen to encourage the funding of overseas developments in place of reducing emissions at home. But the new Conservative government that campaigned in the run-up to the elections against the Kyoto protocol has reduced the likelihood of such arrangements in the near future

(9) HIGHLY OVER-HYPED: GREENLAND'S AND ANTARCTICA'S IMPACTS ON SEA LEVEL

CO2 Science Magazine, 29 March 2006

http://www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2ScienceB2C/articles/V9/N13/EDIT.jsp

In the 24 March 2006 issue of Science, a number of commentaries heralded accelerating discharges of glacial ice from Greenland and Antarctica, while dispensing dire warnings of an imminent large, rapid and accelerating sea-level rise (Bindschadler, 2006; Joughin, 2006; Kerr, 2006; Kennedy and Hanson, 2006). This distressing news was based largely on three reports published in the same issue (Ekstrom et al., 2006; Otto-Bliesner et al., 2006; Overpeck et al., 2006), wherein the unnerving phenomena were attributed to anthropogenic-induced global warming, which is widely claimed to be due primarily to increases in the air's CO2 content that are believed to be driven by the burning of ever increasing quantities of fossil fuels such as coal, gas and oil. But does all of this make any sense?

Consider the report of Ekstrom et al., who studied "glacial earthquakes" caused by sudden sliding motions of glaciers on Greenland. Over the period Jan 1993 to Oct 2005, they determined that (1) all of the best-recorded quakes were associated with major outlet glaciers on the east and west coasts of Greenland between approximately 65 and 76°N latitude, (2) "a clear increase in the number of events is seen starting in 2002," and (3) "to date in 2005, twice as many events have been detected as in any year before 2002."

With respect to the reason for the recent increase in glacial activity on Greenland, Clayton Sandell of ABC News (23 March 2006) quotes Ekstrom as saying "I think it is very hard not to associate this with global warming," which sentiment appears to be shared by almost all of the authors of the seven Science articles. Unwilling to join in that conclusion, however, was Joughin, who in the very same issue presented histories of summer temperature at four Greenland coastal stations located within the same latitude range as the sites of the glacial earthquakes, which histories suggest that it was warmer in this region back in the 1930s than it was over the period of Ekstrom et al.'s analysis. Based on these data, Joughin concluded that "the recent warming is too short to determine whether it is an anthropogenic effect or natural variability," a position that is supported -- and in some cases even more rigorously -- by numerous scientists who have researched the issue, as noted in the following brief synopses of some of their studies.

Hanna and Cappelen (2003), determined the air temperature history of coastal southern Greenland from 1958-2001, based on data from eight Danish Meteorological Institute stations in coastal and near-coastal southern Greenland, as well as the concomitant sea surface temperature (SST) history of the Labrador Sea off southwest Greenland, based on three previously published and subsequently extended SST data sets (Parker et al., 1995; Rayner et al., 1996; Kalnay et al., 1996). Their analyses revealed that the coastal temperature data showed a cooling of 1.29°C over the period of study, while two of the three SST databases also depicted cooling: by 0.44°C in one case and by 0.80°C in the other. In addition, it was determined that the cooling was "significantly inversely correlated with an increased phase of the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) over the past few decades."

In an even broader study based on mean monthly temperatures of 37 Arctic and 7 sub-Arctic stations, as well as temperature anomalies of 30 grid-boxes from the updated data set of Jones, Przybylak (2000) found that (1) "in the Arctic, the highest temperatures since the beginning of instrumental observation occurred clearly in the 1930s," (2) "even in the 1950s the temperature was higher than in the last 10 years," (3) "since the mid-1970s, the annual temperature shows no clear trend," and (4) "the level of temperature in Greenland in the last 10-20 years is similar to that observed in the 19th century." These findings led him to conclude that the meteorological record "shows that the observed variations in air temperature in the real Arctic are in many aspects not consistent with the projected climatic changes computed by climatic models for the enhanced greenhouse effect," because, in his words, "the temperature predictions produced by numerical climate models significantly differ from those actually observed."

In a study that utilized satellite imagery of the Odden ice tongue (a winter ice cover that occurs in the Greenland Sea with a length of about 1300 km and an aerial coverage of as much as 330,000 square kilometers) plus surface air temperature data from adjacent Jan Mayen Island, Comiso et al. (2001) determined that the ice phenomenon was "a relatively smaller feature several decades ago," due to the warmer temperatures that were prevalent at that time. In fact, they report that observational evidence from Jan Mayen Island indicates that temperatures there actually cooled at a rate of 0.15 ± 0.03°C per decade throughout the prior 75 years.

More recently, in a study of three coastal stations in southern and central Greenland that possess almost uninterrupted temperature records between 1950 and 2000, Chylek et al. (2004) discovered that "summer temperatures, which are most relevant to Greenland ice sheet melting rates, do not show any persistent increase during the last fifty years." In fact, working with the two stations with the longest records (both over a century in length), they determined that coastal Greenland's peak temperatures occurred between 1930 and 1940, and that the subsequent decrease in temperature was so substantial and sustained that then-current coastal temperatures were "about 1°C below their 1940 values." Furthermore, they note that "at the summit of the Greenland ice sheet the summer average temperature has decreased at the rate of 2.2°C per decade since the beginning of the measurements in 1987."

At the start of the 20th century, however, Greenland was warming, as it emerged, along with the rest of the world, from the depths of the Little Ice Age. What is more, between 1920 and 1930, when the atmosphere's CO2 concentration rose by a mere 3 to 4 ppm, there was a phenomenal warming at all five coastal locations for which contemporary temperature records are available. In fact, in the words of Chylek et al., "average annual temperature rose between 2 and 4°C [and by as much as 6°C in the winter] in less than ten years." And this warming, as they note, "is also seen in the 18O/16O record of the Summit ice core (Steig et al., 1994; Stuiver et al., 1995; White et al., 1997)."

In commenting on this dramatic temperature rise, which they call the great Greenland warming of the 1920s, Chylek et al. conclude that "since there was no significant increase in the atmospheric greenhouse gas concentration during that time, the Greenland warming of the 1920s demonstrates that a large and rapid temperature increase can occur over Greenland, and perhaps in other regions of the Arctic, due to internal climate variability such as the NAM/NAO [Northern Annular Mode/North Atlantic Oscillation], without a significant anthropogenic influence."

In light of these several real-world observations, it is clear that the recent upswing in glacial activity on Greenland likely has had nothing to do with anthropogenic-induced global warming, as temperatures there have yet to rise either as fast or as high as they did during the great warming of the 1920s, which was clearly a natural phenomenon.

It is also important to recognize the fact that coastal glacial discharge represents only half of the equation relating to sea level change, the other half being inland ice accumulation derived from precipitation; and when the mass balance of the entire Greenland ice sheet was most recently assessed via satellite radar altimetry, quite a different result was obtained than that suggested by the seven Science papers of 24 March. Zwally et al. (2005), for example, found that although "the Greenland ice sheet is thinning at the margins," it is "growing inland with a small overall mass gain." In fact, for the 11-year period 1992-2003, Johannessen et al. (2005) found that "below 1500 meters, the elevation-change rate is -2.0 ± 0.9 cm/year, in qualitative agreement with reported thinning in the ice-sheet margins," but that "an increase of 6.4 ± 0.2 cm/year is found in the vast interior areas above 1500 meters." Spatially averaged over the bulk of the ice sheet, the net result, according to the latter researchers, was a mean increase of 5.4 ± 0.2 cm/year, "or ~60 cm over 11 years, or ~54 cm when corrected for isostatic uplift." Consequently, the Greenland ice sheet experienced no net loss of mass over the last decade for which data are available. Quite to the contrary, in fact, it was host to a net accumulation of ice, which Zwally et al. found to be producing a 0.03 ± 0.01 mm/year decline in sea-level.

In an attempt to downplay the significance of these inconvenient findings, Kerr quotes Zwally as saying he believes that "right now" the Greenland ice sheet is experiencing a net loss of mass. Why? Kerr says Zwally's belief is "based on his gut feeling about the most recent radar and laser observations." Fair enough. But gut feelings are a poor substitute for comprehensive real-world measurements; and even if the things that Zwally's intestines are telling him are ultimately proven to be correct, their confirmation would only demonstrate just how rapidly the Greenland environment can change. Also, we would have to wait and see how long the mass losses prevailed in order to assess their significance within the context of the CO2-induced global warming debate. For the present and immediate future, therefore, we have no choice but to stick with what the existent data and analyses suggest, i.e., that cumulatively since the early 1990s, and conservatively (since the balance is likely still positive), there has been no net loss of mass from the Greenland ice sheet.

The set of Science papers and associated news reports also make much of recent ice discharges from Antarctica, particularly along the Antarctic Peninsula, which has warmed more than any other place on earth over the past fifty years. Little to nothing, however, is said about the fact that the great bulk of the continent has actually cooled over this period, which as in the case of Greenland has also been demonstrated by numerous researchers, as outlined below.

In a study of the entire continent, Comiso (2000) assembled and analyzed Antarctic temperature data from 21 surface stations and from infrared satellites operating from 1979 to 1998. The temperature trend derived from the satellite data was a cooling of 0.42°C per decade, while the trend derived from the station data was a cooling of 0.08°C per decade, which led Comiso to state that these negative temperature trends were "intriguing, since during the same time period a general warming is being observed globally," and to note that "the slight cooling detected in the entire Antarctic region is compatible with a slightly positive trend in the sea ice extent that has been observed from passive microwave data."

Doran et al. (2002) measured a number of meteorological parameters in the McMurdo Dry Valleys of Antarctica between 1986 and 2000, comparing what they learned with what happened concurrently over the rest of the continent, the climatic record of which stretches two additional decades back in time. Over the 14 years of their intensive measurements, the McMurdo Dry valleys cooled at the phenomenal rate of 0.7°C per decade. This dramatic cooling, in the researchers' words, "reflects longer term continental Antarctic cooling between 1966 and 2000." In addition to sharing the same cooling trend, most of the 14-year cooling in the dry valleys occurred in the summer and autumn, just as most of the 35-year cooling over the continent as a whole (which did not include any data from the dry valleys) also occurred in the summer and autumn; and Doran et al. note that this multi-faceted "compatibility with the dry valley data increases the validity of the analysis."

As for the significance of their findings, Doran et al. say that the continental Antarctic cooling documented in their paper "poses challenges to models of climate and ecosystem change." Climate models, as they note, not only predict that global warming should have been occurring over the period of their study, but that there should have been "amplified warming in polar regions." To instead find dramatic cooling (which is about as different from amplified warming as one can get) especially in one of the two places on earth where the climate models are thought to be most correct, represents about as clear-cut a refutation of the predictions of the climate models as one can imagine.

Taking a slightly longer view of the subject, Turner et al. (2005) used a "new and improved" set of Antarctic climate data -- which is described in detail by Turner et al. (2004) -- to examine "the temporal variability and change in some of the key meteorological parameters at Antarctic stations." In doing so, they found the warming at low elevations on the western coast of the Antarctic Peninsula to have been "as large as any increase observed on Earth over the last 50 years," which at the Faraday (now Vernadsky) station amounted to about 2.5°C. However, they say that "the region of marked warming is quite limited and is restricted to an arc from the southwestern part of the peninsula, through Faraday to a little beyond the tip of the peninsula."

With respect to the bigger picture of the vast bulk of the continent, the nine climate scientists remark that "of the 19 stations examined in this study for which annual trends could be computed, 11 stations have experienced warming over their whole length, seven stations have cooled, and one station had too little data to allow an annual trend to be computed." Considering that four of the stations that warmed are associated with the Antarctic Peninsula, however, there is little that can be said about the temperature trend of the entire continent, which issue they skillfully skirt. However, they do report "there has been a broad-scale change in the nature of the temperature trends between 1961-90 and 1971-2000." Specifically, they report that of the ten coastal stations that have long enough records to allow 30-year temperature trends to be computed for both of these periods, "eight had a larger warming trend (or a smaller cooling trend) in the earlier [our italics] period." In fact, four of them changed from warming to cooling, as did the interior Vostok site; and at the South Pole the rate of cooling intensified by a factor of six.

These observations reveal that over the latter part of the 20th century, i.e., the period of time that according to climate alarmists experienced the most dramatic global warming of the entire past two millennia, fully 80% of the Antarctic coastal stations with sufficiently long temperature records experienced either an intensification of cooling or a reduced rate of warming; while four coastal sites and one interior site actually shifted from warming to cooling.

In light of these facts, it is clear there is a serious disconnect between reality and the virtual world of climate modeling; and since everything else in the 24 March 2006 set of glacial ice Science papers pertains to climate modeling, there is not much else that need be said about them ... except, perhaps, to note that the modeling pertains primarily to the prior interglacial, which makes it essentially meaningless for two additional reasons. First, if the models can't replicate what happened in earth's polar regions over the past few decades, there's surely no reason to give any credence to what they tell us about something that occurred 130,000 years ago. And second, one can easily get the right answer to a computational problem for any number of compensating wrong reasons, so that even a "correct" replication does not imply that the mechanics of the modeled phenomenon are correctly understood.

Sherwood, Keith and Craig Idso

Full References at

http://www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2ScienceB2C/articles/V9/N13/EDIT.jsp

(10) TRENDS OF 20TH-CENTURY RIVER FLOW

CO2 Science Magazine, 29 March 2006

http://www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2ScienceB2C/articles/V9/N13/C1.jsp

Reference

Svensson, C., Kundzewicz, Z.W. and Maurer, T. 2005. Trend detection in river flow series: 2. Flood and low-flow index series. Hydrological Sciences Journal 50: 811-824.

Background

Climate models predict that one of the potential consequences of CO2-induced global warming is an enhancement of the world's hydrologic cycle, which is projected to result in increased precipitation and floods. At the same time, however, the models also predict longer and more severe droughts due to increased evapotranspiration driven by rising temperatures. Given such predictions, recent major floods and droughts in Europe and North America have led climate alarmists to proclaim they are due to global warming. But is this attribution correct?

What was done

In an effort to evaluate model projections of increased floods and droughts as a result of global warming, the authors examined 20th-century river flow data for a group of 21 stations distributed about the globe that they obtained from the Global Runoff Data Centre in Koblenz, Germany. Individual record lengths of the 21 stations varied from 44 to 100 years, with an average of 68 years. Analyses of the data consisted of computing trends in flood magnitude, flood frequency, and low-flow index series using Mann-Kendall and linear regression methods.

What was learned

In terms of flood magnitude and frequency, the analysis revealed there were slightly more stations exhibiting significant negative trends (reduced flooding) than significant positive trends (increased flooding). With respect to low-flow trends, nearly all stations showed increasing trends, approximately half of which were significant at the 90% level.

What it means

The results of this analysis, according to Svensson et al., indicate "there is no general pattern of increasing or decreasing numbers or magnitudes of floods, but there are significant increases in half of the low-flow series." These real-world observations are not consistent with model predictions of river flow response to global warming, since the world's climate alarmists claim that the planet experienced a warming over the latter part of the 20th century that was unprecedented over the past two millennia. If anything, therefore, and if the warming was truly as great as they claim, the data tend to support just the opposite relationship between warming and flood and drought occurrences.

(11) AND FINALLY: CLIMATE CHANGE: THE RICE GENOME TO THE RESCUE

Eurekalert, 27 March 2006

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-03/irri-cct032706.php

Contact: Duncan Macintosh

d.macintosh@cgiar.org

632-580-5673

International Rice Research Institute

Climate change: The rice genome to the rescue

The sequencing of the rice genome could help mitigate the impact of climate change on the world's poor

Los Baños, Philippines – New evidence is emerging that climate change could reduce not only the world's ability to produce food but also international efforts to cut poverty. However, the recent sequencing of the rice genome is already providing researchers with some of the tools they need to help poor rice farmers and consumers avoid the worst effects of the problem.

The new knowledge generated by the sequencing effort is allowing scientists to both develop new rice varieties faster and with the specific characteristics needed to deal with climate change, such as tolerance of higher temperatures. However, scientists are calling for more research to fully understand the impact of climate change – especially the extreme weather it may cause – on international efforts to reduce poverty and ensure food security.

A "Climate Change and Rice" planning workshop this month at the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) in the Philippines was told that climate change is already affecting Asia's ability to produce rice, and that this could eventually slow efforts to reduce poverty in the region, where most of the world's poor live.

The workshop was informed that, to overcome many of the climate change–related problems facing rice production in Asia – and continue to meet the demand for rice in the region – yields will have to double over the next 50 years. Research has confirmed that global warming will make rice crops less productive with increasing temperatures decreasing yields.

"Clearly, climate change is going to have a major impact on our ability to grow rice," Robert S. Zeigler, IRRI director general, said. "We can't afford to sit back and be complacent about this because rice production feeds almost half the world's population while providing vital employment to millions as well, with most of them being very poor and vulnerable."

For these reasons, Dr. Zeigler announced at the workshop that IRRI – in an unprecedented move – was ready to put up US$2 million of its own research funds as part of an effort to raise $20–25 million for a major five-year project to mitigate the effects of climate change on rice production. "We need to start developing rice varieties that can tolerate higher temperatures and other aspects of climate change right now," he said.

"Fortunately, the recent sequencing of the rice genome will allow us to do this much faster than we could have in the past," Dr. Zeigler added. "But, in addition to new rice varieties, we must develop other technologies that will help poor rice farmers deal with climate change."

In one of several examples presented to last week's climate workshop, researchers mentioned El Niño weather phenomena that hit the Philippines in 1996-97 and caused a severe drought, resulting in a sharp drop in national rice production. Other examples focused on the impact of climate change and variability on gross domestic product, generally causing it to slip by several percentage points.

"One of the main problems with climate change is that the effects are felt mostly in poor, underdeveloped countries because of their reliance on agriculture as one of the main drivers for national development," Dr. Zeigler said. "In turn, agriculture is very dependent on climate.

"Another more insidious effect may be more frequent extreme weather events such as typhoons, floods and droughts," Dr. Zeigler warned. "IRRI's research has shown that even one drought year can push millions of rice farmers back below the poverty line. This affects the whole family for many years after the drought year, as they will have sold their livestock and withdrawn their children from school just to survive."

IRRI's senior climate change researcher, John Sheehy, told the workshop that poor farmers need help in several challenging new areas. "We need to develop rice varieties tolerant of higher temperatures that can maintain yield and quality when extreme temperatures occur," Dr. Sheehy said. "We also need rice varieties that can take advantage of higher levels of CO2 in the atmosphere, rice that is vigorous enough to recover quickly from extreme weather events and disasters, and very high yielding rice that will provide a supply buffer for poor communities during periods of change.

"We need to be able to protect poor people from the harmful effects of climate change, and rice is especially important because most of the world's poor depend on it," he added. "We also need to ensure that the world community is not adversely affected by greenhouse gas emissions from rice production systems."

Dr. Sheehy said researchers need to acquire knowledge and develop technologies critical to ensuring that rice production systems are sustainable in the face of climate change and do not adversely contribute to climate change.

###

The International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) is the world's leading rice research and training center. Based in the Philippines and with offices in 10 other Asian countries, it is an autonomous, nonprofit institution focused on improving the well-being of present and future generations of rice farmers and consumers, particularly those with low incomes, while preserving natural resources. IRRI is one of 15 centers funded through the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), an association of public and private donor agencies. Please visit the Web sites of the CGIAR (www.cgiar.org) or Future Harvest Foundation (www.futureharvest.org), a nonprofit organization that builds awareness and supports food and environmental research.

For information, please contact:

Duncan Macintosh, IRRI, DAPO Box 7777, Metro Manila, Philippines; tel +63-2-580-5600; fax: +63-2-580-5699; email d.macintosh@cgiar.org or Johnny Goloyugo at j.goloyugo@cgiar.org Web sites: IRRI Home (www.irri.org), IRRI Library (http://ricelib.irri.cgiar.org), Rice Knowledge Bank (www.knowledgebank.irri.org)

CCNet is a scholarly electronic network edited by Benny Peiser. To subscribe, send an e-mail to listserver@livjm.ac.uk (“subscribe cambridge-conference”). Information circulated on this network is for scholarly and educational use only. The attached information may not be copied or reproduced for any other purposes without prior permission of the copyright holders. DISCLAIMER: The opinions, beliefs and viewpoints expressed in the articles and texts and in other CCNet contributions do not necessarily reflect the opinions, beliefs and viewpoints of the editor.

http://www.staff.livjm.ac.uk/spsbpeis/