UK Environment Secretary David Milliband talking about the UN climate talks in Nairobi said:
“I come away from this conference with two senses: one, the world community can make progress when it puts its mind to it, but two, my goodness we really need to up the momentum, we need to increase the acceleration,” he told BBC News.
“And for that, you don’t just need environment ministers – you need prime ministers, finance ministers, and foreign secretaries to put themselves behind this global drive.”
Never was a truer word spoken. Environment ministers are typically junior ministers who are sent off to meetings like Nairobi with a brief that they can’t change in any way that means anything. Meanwhile the finance ministers of the G20, the most economically powerful countries, were devising an energy freeway in Melbourne and many of their bosses were talking about nothing much at APEC.
But the Nairobi climate talks were declared a success as UN meetings invariably are, officially at least. The way I heard it on the BBC last night is that those who wanted to do nothing subsantial won. The Europeans wanted “a root and branch examination of emission targets and all the other components of the protocol� which, I understand, is what should happen at this point under the Kyoto Protocol. It seems the developing countries want to expand their pollution capacity before they get drawn into the net. Having learnt from bitter experience how these things usually go in trade negotiations under the WTO, they want to avoid being shafted by the rich countries.
The Chinese gave a great show and tell last month at Monterrey
outlining ambitious plans to match their concern on climate with a big programme of investment in energy efficiency.
Which is just as well, because the place is in a mess. Angus Grigg in an article in the weekend edition of the Australian Financial Review (tragically not on the internet) said:
China will burn more than 2.2 billion tonnes of coal this year – seven times Australia’s production and double the amount five years ago. But less than 15 per cent of its power stations have the most basic sulphur dioxide filters, and so a third of the country is afflicted with acid rain.
As for its rivers, 70 per cent are poisoned and 10 per cent of its grain has heavy metal contamination. According to the World Bank, it has 16 of the world’s 20 most polluted cities.
And just as an afterthought, 54 million rural Chinese are drinking water contaminated by fluorine or arsenic.
We must remember, though, that China believes that manufactured carried on anywhere else is an offence to the natural order of things. At the same time a stack of other countries are hell bent on cranking up or retaining their own manufacturing capacity.
The Europeans don’t want to lose out but desperately do want to do something about emissions control. They have the US in their sights:
EU climate policy is gearing up to confront the US. Imports from countries that refuse to ratify the Kyoto Protocol could be subject to punitive tariff duties — a new measure intended to pressure the Bush Administration. A climate tax on flights may also be introduced.
The Europeans are usually pretty thorough, I find. Apart from the US they have noted that of the countries which should have signed up to Kyoto, Kazakhstan now plans to do so. That just leaves Croatia and Australia.
But all the same it’s good to see that despite our observer status in Nairobi, Australia still has respeck. Played a ‘key role’, apparently:
So look for it. The ‘new Kyoto’ should be on the shelves just in time for Christmas.
Apparently everything in the world, including the economic future of 1 billion Chinese, must be subordinated to the goal of reducing carbon emissions.
You know, I just don’t think that technological solutions will cut it in time. How many solar panels and wind turbines will China need?
So, I have the perfect solution. War. There is a shortage of armed conflict on this planet, and I call on the Howard Government to do something about it. (The pathetic effort in Iraq is hardly sufficient.)
OK, on the negative side, there is some extra CO2 generated by the tanks and planes zooming about. But consider all the benefits:
. You can bomb power infrastructure, like the Israelis did in Gaza and Lebanon. I can’t think of a better way to quickly reduce energy use.
. Furthermore, dead soldiers and civilians won’t be consuming energy ever again. Nor will they have any energy-guzzling offspring.
. If you pick the right target country, you can stop oil production. I have it on good authority that George Bush secretly decided to commit his presidency to combating climate change, and resolved that the potentially second-biggest oil producer would be put out of commission for years to come.
. Finally, if global warming is getting completely out of control, we can drag those nukes out of the basement and put them to good use. If Carl Sagan was right, we could generate a dust-cloud nuclear winter, which would be just the thing to offset the CO2 warming.
Now, you might think this cure is somewhat severe. But if you’re willing to accept the continuing impoverishment of billions to combat climate change, why not just kill ‘em instead? They can have their Playstations in Heaven.
I can’t find the report saying so, but I believe I read something saying that Australia’s role at the conference was, essentially, playing silly buggers to try to slow down negotiations.
Great leadership at work there.
Robert I’ve found it difficult to come by much decent comment on what went on in Nairobi, so I’m hoping this post will flush something out.
From the bits I’ve heard India in very disinterested on limits to pollutuion until they have gained an appropriate capacity to pollute.
Meanwhile we have this in the Courier Mail
The best news I’ve heard in a while.
Just heard on the radio that Minchin plugs the same old line. The draft nuclear report is due tomorrow, so we can look forward to that.
Bono has sought and been granted an audience with Peter Costello who was making out that they were going to talk about pop music. He couldn’t be that stupid. If so he’s in for a surprise.
Rudd is in China right now, speaking mandarin – maybe he’ll come back with a policy advance that links China and Australia in carbon trading and renewables technology – just in time for a xmas challenge to flat-footed Beazley.
Yes, by all reports India are dragging their feet.
Apologies for the bluntness, but somebody might want to point out to them that if they’ve got 150 million Bangladeshis next door who might be looking for a new home if sea levels rise.
The OECD, 1 billion people, produces 50% of global Co2 pollution.
China, with 1.5 billion, produces 18% of world’s Co2 pollution.
Seems to me we need to be more worried about the OECD than China for a fair while yet. If anybody’s dragging their feet it is the rich – as usual.
For information, Australia Talks Back tomorrow will be on carbon trading.
My question about Nairobi is how does Christine Milne justify being there? As one of the Greens who is running the line that human activity is the cause of global warming shouldn’t she be doing her bit by swearing of unnecessary air travel? Her flying to this conference means that she is personally responsible for adding about 4 tonnes of excess CO2 into the air. The colour of hypocrisy is surely Green
Yeah, Greens should stop breathing too. Less Co2, less hot air and cooler planet. Win and win.