News24

COP 17: Financing battle emerges

2011-11-29 22:50

Durban - International climate negotiators were at odds on Tuesday on how to raise billions of dollars to help poor countries cope with global warming.

A major shipping group is willing to help, endorsing a proposal for a carbon tax on vessels carrying the world's trade.

Details of the tussle over the funding emerged as the UN's weather agency reported that 2011 was tied as the 10th hottest year since records began in 1850.

Arctic sea ice, a barometer for the entire planet, had shrunk to a record low volume, said the World Meteorological Organisation.

Putting the final touches on what's known as the Green Climate Fund is a top issue at the 192-party UN climate conference that was in its second day on Tuesday in Durban, and one of the keys of a strategy to contain greenhouse gas emissions and keep global warming within manageable limits.

The two-week conference is to finalise a plan on managing climate finances, due to scale up to $100bn annually by 2020.

The International Chamber of Shipping, representing about 80% of the world's merchant marine, joined forces with aid groups Oxfam and WWF International on Tuesday to urge the conference to adopt guidelines for a levy on carbon emissions by ships.

Details of any levy would be worked out by the International Maritime Organisation, the UN agency regulating international shipping, the aid groups and the chamber said in a joint statement.

Bunker fuels

"Shipping has to take responsibility for the emissions and get to grips and drive them down, and they see that the best way to do that it to have a universal charge applied to all ships that is going to generate billions of dollars" to fight climate change, Tim Gore of Oxfam said on the sidelines of the climate conference.

About 50 000 cargo ships carry 90% of world trade, and most ships are powered by heavily polluting oil known as bunker fuels.

Last July the UN maritime organisation decided that new cargo vessels must meet energy efficiency standards and cut pollution.

It was the first climate change measure to apply equally to countries regardless of whether they are from the industrialised or developing world.

At the conference, differences came into focus over the Green Climate Fund.

Delegations disagreed about how independent the fund will be, by whom it will be guided over the years, and whether the bulk of the money will come from public funds and government aid or from private sources and investments.

A 40-nation committee worked on a draft agreement in several lengthy meetings over the last year, but a consensus at the final meeting last month was blocked by objections from the US and Saudi Arabia. Now negotiators in Durban must settle the final disputes.

"We are going to have a very thorough and open discussion on that very contentious paper," said Pedro Pedroso, the delegate from Cuba.

'Issues'

US delegate Jonathan Pershing said on Monday the US has "substantive concerns" about the committee's plan, but "we believe these issues can be fixed".

Washington wants to ensure that private investments are not hamstrung by bureaucracy and that they can bypass any approval process by governments.

The world temperatures report released on Tuesday provided a bleak backdrop to negotiators seeking ways to limit pollution blamed for global warming.

2011 has been a year of extreme weather, the WMO reported.

Drought in East Africa has left tens of thousands dead; lethal floods submerged large areas of Asia; the US suffered 14 separate weather catastrophes with damage topping $1bn each, including severe drought in Texas and the southwest, heavy floods in the northeast and the Mississippi valley, and the most active tornado season ever known.

"The science is solid and proves unequivocally that the world is warming," said RDJ Lengoasa, the WMO's deputy director, and human activity is a significant contributor.

"Climate change is real, and we are already observing its manifestations in weather and climate patterns around the world," he said.

Comments
  • Jack - 2011-11-30 03:01

    Only the deluded are denying climate change! The climate is changing, the past 2 years have been interesting, thing is - It's Mostly NATURAL. CO2 is essential for life, we exhale CO2, plants inhale CO2. This Climate agenda is pure propaganda against all life forms. Many think COP17 is about pollution, when in fact it isn't, it's only about CO2 & implementing a criminal Carbon TAX/ Carbon trading scheme that'll increase the cost of living for all, kill many suffering from poverty, accelerate the death of economies (Especially during the Global Economic Depression) and halt the industrial growth of 3rd world nations. How will TAX help, will they build a climate changing machine, to revert the change? Please, Wake up! They've played with people's emotions, brainwashed, manipulated, preyed on the ignorant - Created Green Nazis, a new "GREEN" Religion/ Zombie Cult following to push an evil hidden agenda against the people "ignorantly" helping them, these liars don't care about the environment, let alone you and I. If we allow these devils to get their way, we're chaining ourselves, our children & all future generations to a wall of deep regret. Many true scientists know it's a Scam, they're ridiculed & hushed from the mainstream. The others are nothing short of greedy prostitutes - Manipulating figures & lying for money - what's new?

      Robin - 2011-11-30 07:34

      Spot on Jack. And all this is called science??

      ludlowdj - 2011-11-30 09:10

      Spot on Jack, Climate change has been a natural phenomenon for the last 60 million years, millions of years before man crawled out of the slime. It will continue as a natural cycle long after man has turned to dust. this entire COP 17 fiasco is nothing short of the elite finding new and interesting ways to blind us to the truth and to maximize their own profit potential. So called DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT long ago stopped being in service to their populations and became self enriching dictatorships who's only concern is profit at any cost

      Amanda - 2011-11-30 10:15

      Hey, just mention funding and everyone is suddenly concerned about their environment and how much money they'll need to cope! It's like flies on manure. Every country with their begging bowl out for MY TAXES.

      mooketsi.nthite - 2011-11-30 10:18

      Hi Jack. You think Climate Change is just another money making scheme? Please tell me more I am very interested, where can I read up on this I have never looked at it this way...

      mooketsi.nthite - 2011-11-30 10:22

      Hi Jack, nah Im not robbing you of you car haha. Please tell me more about your theory of climate change being another money making scheme. I never really looked at it from your perspective but come to think of it it makes perfect sense. Where can I read up more on this?

      Ernst - 2011-11-30 14:56

      @Jack: "The climate is changing, the past 2 years have been interesting, thing is - It's Mostly NATURAL." It is obviously true that past climate change was caused by natural forcings. However, to argue that this means we can’t cause climate change is like arguing that humans can’t start bushfires because in the past they’ve happened naturally. Greenhouse gas increases have caused climate change many times in Earth’s history, and we are now adding greenhouse gases to the atmosphere at a increasingly rapid rate. http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-change-little-ice-age-medieval-warm-period-intermediate.htm "CO2 is essential for life, we exhale CO2, plants inhale CO2. This Climate agenda is pure propaganda against all life forms." While there are direct ways in which CO2 is a pollutant (acidification of the ocean), its primary impact is its greenhouse warming effect. While the greenhouse effect is a natural occurence, too much warming has severe negative impacts on agriculture, health and environment. http://www.skepticalscience.com/ocean-acidification-global-warming.htm http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-plant-food.htm "How will TAX help, will they build a climate changing machine, to revert the change? Please, Wake up!" If you dont want to pay carbon tax then invest in clean energy. And as for scientific consensus see: http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus-intermediate.htm

      Ernst - 2011-11-30 14:58

      @Robin: You continually make bold statements but you never back it up with citations pointing to peer-reviewed scientific papers that back up your claims.

      Ernst - 2011-11-30 15:06

      Here is a rudimentary list of prestigious scientific organizations that, based on PEER-REVIEWED research, endorse Anthropogenic Global Warming: Scientific organizations endorsing the consensus The following scientific organizations endorse the consensus position that "most of the global warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities": American Association for the Advancement of Science American Astronomical Society American Chemical Society American Geophysical Union American Institute of Physics American Meteorological Society American Physical Society Australian Coral Reef Society Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society Australian Bureau of Meteorology and the CSIRO British Antarctic Survey Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society Environmental Protection Agency European Federation of Geologists European Geosciences Union European Physical Society Federation of American Scientists Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies Geological Society of America Geological Society of Australia International Union for Quaternary Research (INQUA) International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics National Center for Atmospheric Research National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Royal Meteorological Society Royal Society of the UK

  • Jack - 2011-11-30 03:02

    The sun is changing, the earth's magnetic poles have shifted, the earth has slightly tilted, the moon has changed position etc. Many factors are greater than man. I agree pollution is a problem, we should all respect the environment and seek alternative energy solutions - Just remember this whole agenda has nothing to do with pollutants - ONLY "Evil" CO2, Money, Population Reduction & Global Control. These are the same people that start illegal wars & suppress free energy technologies in favor of oil - Another example of control - Real cold blooded Hypocrites! Research - Climategate 2.0, Lord Christopher Monckton, Piers Corbyn, "The Great Global Warming Swindle", "Inuit People on Pole Shift" & "Propaganda" by Edward Bernays.

      Breinlekkasie - 2011-11-30 07:27

      Even if these guys were honest we don't have the technology to get this to work at a reasonable price. Renewable energy sources are expensive and unable to produce the volumes energy required to sustain the world. Most of these so called low emission technologies doesn't solve the problem it shifts the problem.

      ludlowdj - 2011-11-30 09:12

      not to mention web sights like pole shift.ning and Zetatalk which have spent in excess of 20 years telling us what is coming and have been spot on with every prediction to date.

      Ernst - 2011-11-30 14:48

      I think you should see: http://www.skepticalscience.com/Monckton_Myths.htm http://www.skepticalscience.com/solar-activity-sunspots-global-warming.htm

      Ernst - 2011-11-30 15:07

      Here is a rudimentary list of prestigious scientific organizations that, based on PEER-REVIEWEDresearch, endorse Anthropogenic Global Warming: Scientific organizations endorsing the consensus The following scientific organizations endorse the consensus position that "most of the global warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities": American Association for the Advancement of Science American Astronomical Society American Chemical Society American Geophysical Union American Institute of Physics American Meteorological Society American Physical Society Australian Coral Reef Society Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society Australian Bureau of Meteorology and the CSIRO British Antarctic Survey Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society Environmental Protection Agency European Federation of Geologists European Geosciences Union European Physical Society Federation of American Scientists Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies Geological Society of America Geological Society of Australia International Union for Quaternary Research (INQUA) International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics National Center for Atmospheric Research National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Royal Meteorological Society Royal Society of the UK

  • Jack - 2011-11-30 05:05

    What are the odds of flash floods in KZN, the night before COP17?

      Robin - 2011-11-30 07:36

      I guess some would call it a divine message! Love it!

      Amanda - 2011-11-30 10:16

      In Coppenhagen it was snow storms. I think Mother Nature is trying to tell these beggars and gravy train shonkers it's time to fly home on your carbon emitting jets, on my money.

      Ernst - 2011-11-30 14:59

      @Robin: You continually make bold statements but you never back it up with citations pointing to peer-reviewed scientific papers that back up your claims.

      Ernst - 2011-11-30 15:09

      @Amanda: Since the mid 1970s, global temperatures have been warming at around 0.2 degrees Celsius per decade. However, weather imposes its own dramatic ups and downs over the long term trend. We expect to see record cold temperatures even during global warming. Nevertheless over the last decade, daily record high temperatures occurred twice as often as record lows. This tendency towards hotter days is expected to increase as global warming continues into the 21st Century.

  • Peter - 2011-11-30 07:29

    They are at odds as to how to raise the money because there are some sensible heads there who know that the 3rd world countries ( SA in particular ) leaders will pinch all the money

  • Robin - 2011-11-30 07:40

    Of course climate change is real! It's nothing new - it's been going on for the past few million years. But all of a sudden it's man's fault and we have to don sackcloth and ashes and pay vast sums of our hard-earned cash into the coffers of the Church of Gore. The whole thing stinks!

      Ernst - 2011-11-30 14:44

      It is obviously true that past climate change was caused by natural forcings. However, to argue that this means we can’t cause climate change is like arguing that humans can’t start bushfires because in the past they’ve happened naturally. Greenhouse gas increases have caused climate change many times in Earth’s history, and we are now adding greenhouse gases to the atmosphere at a increasingly rapid rate.

  • Soetdoring - 2011-11-30 09:10

    Something very serious is wrong and I quote " the UN's weather agency reported that 2011 was tied as the 10th hottest year since records began in 1850". Why only 10th hottest year? If we are to beliewe the alarmists, then with CO2 increasing every year, the average temperature every year should be a record - and not only the 10th highest. Maybe other factors are stronger driving forces of temperature and the rize in CO2 we observe is just a consequence of this. I am still waiting for the tree huggers to explain the 30 year long global drop in temperature between 1945 and 1975 as well as the decline in temperature during the last 10 years.... and all this occured while CO2 was steadily rising.

      Robin - 2011-11-30 09:46

      Yep, and go read: http://www.c3headlines.com/2011/11/the-un-lies-of-durban-global-warming-is-unprecedented-unquivocal-accelerating.html

      Soetdoring - 2011-11-30 10:20

      @ Robin: Many thanks for that reference. Those graphs should be printed and distributed to every delegate at the Durban simposium. Very important information and another nail in the coffin of the alarmists CO2 scare.

      Ernst - 2011-11-30 15:01

      @Robin: Is the below source peer-reviewed? http://www.c3headlines.com/2011/11/the-un-lies-of-durban-global-warming-is-unprecedented-unquivocal-accelerating.html

      Soetdoring - 2011-12-01 14:22

      @Ernst - the source is not peer reviewed, but the articles in there are. On the question of peer review: Was the info in Al Gore's Nobel movie peer reviewed? I take it Mann's hockey stick article was peer reviewed, but it still got debunked by others. Peer review means nothing in climate science. An alarmist will easily get the thumbs up from his buddies when it gets to the approval of an article.

      Ernst - 2011-12-01 17:16

      @Soetdoring: How do you know that the articles in there are peer-reviewed? Perhaps you should see: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/myths-vs-fact-regarding-the-hockey-stick/

  • Jiri - 2011-11-30 09:38

    I think we are barking at the wrong tree. We don't need these billions of dollars and of course we are not going to get them The solution is simpler and in house so to speak. We need at home to see what is our wastage and tackle that. If electricity is saved by switching off lights at night especially office blocks. If electricity is charged on a sliding scale we could more than likely save 100/500 megawatts. How much less coal is burned for that. If street lights are powered by small solar systems, what is the saving. We should put out a tender to invent solar panels. Government municipalities to be privatized etc. Then there will found a way to reduce wastage. Traffic lights to be better synchronized saving huge amount of fuel which is imported and pollutes the air. Everywhere in our country their are traffic jams because the traffic lights are not synchronized. has anyone ever worked out these costs. My car has a computer monitoring fuel usage etc and have on several occasion measured the fuel usage over the 5 km stretch on the Zambezi road on good days and bad days. The difference is about 1 liter of fuel more. Extrapolate that by 100000 cars at various trouble spots in mayor towns. A million liters a day less junk into our atmosphere. Wow.. Start at home and save. Let South Africa lead the way.Oh Yes the carbon tax on big cars is to little triple it.

  • pages:
  • 1