Suzy B Software 2/Suzy B Software CD-ROM 2 (1994).iso/nasa/eco893_5/exo893_5.txt

Text File | 1995-05-02 | 28KB | 613 lines

                          ECO NEWSLETTER

                CLIMATE TALKS GENEVA - AUGUST 1993
                          NGO NEWSLETTER

                               INC 8

                         August 20, 1993
                             ISSUE #5

                        TABLE OF CONTENTS


.1            UV-B Increase Observed Over Populated Areas
.2            Towards a Fossil Fuel Free Future
.3            JI: The Explosive Cocktail
.4            Cities Complete Local CO2 Inventories
.5            Leman
.6            Editorial
.7            Working Group I
.8            Working Group II
.9            Contacts
.10           Credits


ECO has been published by Non-Governmental Environmental Groups
at major international conferences since the Stockholm
Environment Conference in 1972. This issue is produced
cooperatively by Climate Action Network groups attending the
Climate Talks in Geneva, August, 1993.

******************************************************************

UV-B Increase Observed Over Populated Regions

by M. Oppenheimer, Senior Scientist, EDF

Seven years of intensive research on the stratosphere have
established that chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and related chemicals
produced by industrial societies are depleting the ozone layer.
The cause and effect relationship between CFCs and the genesis of
the Antarctic ozone hole is certain. Recent studies confirm that
these chemicals are causing ozone loss in the Arctic as well.

Furthermore, a downward trend in annual ozone levels at mid
latitudes since 1979 has been observed. According to the 1991
Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion, published by WMO and
UNEP, the weight of the evidence is that this trend is largely
attributable to chlorine and bromine originating in the very same
CFCs and related chemicals. In addition, record low ozone values
in 1992 may reflect the effect of the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo.

One key uncertainty in scientific understanding of ozone
depletion has been the precise extent of changes in the level of
ultraviolet radiation reaching the surface of the Earth. All
other things being equal, depletion of the ozone layer must cause
an increase in biologically active ultraviolet radiation (UV-B)
at Earth's surface. But long-term monitoring of UV-B has been
inadequate to determine the actual trend, and all other things
may not have been equal.

Cloudiness or levels of air pollution could have increased at
some locations over the period since the onset of ozone
depletion. Since clouds and some pollution absorb and reflect
UV-B, both changes could have negated part of the expected
increase in UV-B due to ozone depletion over the same period.

The difficult task of accounting for cloud cover in UV-B
measurements has been accomplished and reported in a recent
article in the Journal of Geophysical Research by John Frederick
of the University of Chicago and his co-workers, based on
observations at Ushuaia in Southern Argentina. The results are
surprising and disturbing.

They find that average UV-B at noontime in December 1990 (near
summer solstice) was 45% higher than it would have been had the
ozone layer been "normal." This large change in UV-B probably
arose from processes occurring in the nearby ozone hole over
Antarctica, which had dissipated earlier in the year, affecting a
broader region of the Southern Hemisphere. Variations this large
may not occur every year, as they likely depend on the size of
the ozone hole and on the manner in which it dissipates.

This finding is very important because it is the first reliable
determination of an absolute change in UV-B associated with ozone
depletion over a populated area (Ushuaia has over 11,000
residents; nearby Punta Arenas, Chile, is home to nearly 100,000
people). Second, it occurred not in winter, but when the sun was
highest, both in terms of season and time of day, a prime
condition for biological damage to occur. Third, the large size
of the change and the fact that it occurred in an unpolluted
region means that the observed increase in UV-B radiation
indicates the consequences of a depleted ozone layer.

While a downward trend in ozone levels has been detected over the
mid latitudes, the expected increase in ultraviolet radiation in
these regions may have been partly offset by the effect of air
pollution. "If true," note the authors of the Ushuaia study,
"this fortuitous situation seems unlikely to continue." Indeed,
as pollution levels fall over industrialized countries in the
northern hemisphere, this UV-B masking effect may disappear.

******************************************************************

Towards a Fossil Fuel Free Future

Global warming is above all a fossil fuel problem. Unless we
drastically reduce carbon emissions, unprecedented climate change
is predicted. Fossil fuels are not a viable long-term energy
option for the planet.

Could the world as we know it be run on renewable energy? Is it
really possible to maintain our transportation, industries,
appliances, and homes with a range of natural energy flows such
as solar, wind, biomass, geothermal, and hydro? A new study from
Greenpeace International confirms that this is indeed the case.

Fossil Fuels in a Changing Climate - available to delegates at
INC 8 - concludes that in spite of the use of conventional
assumptions for economic and population growth (which Greenpeace
does not support), it is technically and economically feasible to
halve the current global use of fossil fuels within 40 years.
Global emissions of CO2 could fall by 52% by 2030, and 71% by
2075.

This scenario is based on a major programme for improving energy
efficiency in all regions of the world. This would mean
developing efficient cars, giving 4.2 to 3.6 litres/100km, and
developing a solar-hydrogen energy system. It would mean
constructing highly insulated buildings needing less than 30% of
today's energy average for heating, lighting, and cooling. It
would mean advanced industrial processes using less materials,
and perhaps a quarter of the average energy intensities of today.
Most of these technologies are either already available, or
likely to be in use in the near future. The challenge is to
ensure their widespread adoption around the world. Making such a
future a reality will, however, require major policy changes,
such as:

* The introduction of pollution controls in the form of energy
taxes.

* The removal of subsidies to fossil fuels and nuclear power.

* The introduction of minimum efficiency standards for a range of
appliances, lighting, electrical motors, and vehicles.

* New incentives to gas and electrical utilities to sell energy
efficiency, for example, by introducing integrated resource
planning.

* The setting up of a new international agency for energy
efficiency and renewable energy.

To achieve such a fossil-free energy future, countries would need
to set and maintain tough targets for the reduction of CO2. If we
are not to become a fossil species of planet Earth ourselves, we
need to embark on a fossil-free path without delay.

******************************************************************

JI: The Explosive Cocktail

Report by Irving Mintzer, SEI

Despite an initial spirit of cooperation, differences of opinion
quickly emerged among the panelists at last night's JI Round
Table. Several recurring themes ran through the discussion: the
most important being cost-effectiveness. In general it was noted
that JI can be used to insure "broader participation in
mitigation measures", but it could also be used [by rich
countries] to buy their way out of commitments. Despite this, the
concept has survived, and may even have helped to get the
Convention passed.

One participant stated that his attendance was conditioned on the
assurance that everyone would ratify the Convention before they
left the room. We understand from the Secretariat that the
instruments of ratification had not been deposited as of
midnight. Eco hopes the chairs are comfortable to sleep in.

Continuing the discussion of alternative criteria, termed the
"Sons of Joint implementation", an early experiment in JI was
compared unfavorably to the 1863 riots in New York. In this first
instance, rich men tried to buy their way out of their legal
responsibilities to serve their country as soldiers; this time,
rich white men are trying to escape their responsibilities for
fighting the pollution that their wanton consumption has caused.
Does that mean that we can expect riots the next time the INC
meets in New York?

More seriously, participants reaffirmed the need to keep our
"legal and moral obligations under the Convention. We can't
create the political will throughout world [needed to save the
atmosphere], unless everyone around the world is prepared to
sacrifice and give up something." One concluded that developing
countries will have to give up something valuable because
pollution has closed the traditional path of development.

Some felt that JI was not proceeding fast enough, that JI was the
best mechanism to promote technology transfer, and that pilot
projects should be encouraged. This seemed of particular
importance for Central and Eastern European states who are eager
for it. But others disagreed, noted "controversies over JI could
leave us wondering at the end of the day, did we choose the best
mechanism?"

The participants debated whether Joint Implementation was
actually cost-effective, or whether we were becoming confused,
indiscriminately mixing the economic cost and the political cost
of JI in the discussion. Some feared that developed countries are
trying to avoid the political costs of tough domestic decisions.

Left unanswered was the question: If Joint Implementation of
commitments is really cost effective, are those commitments
themselves adequate to achieve the objectives of the Convention?
In this context, one participant asked whether it was consistent
for countries to receive credit for overseas actions that reduce
the risk of global warming but not be debited for actions that
contribute to the risk of rapid climate change.

One latecomer to the NGO community argued that Article 4.2(a) and
(b) imply reports on two different kinds of commitments: one a
commitment for domestic reductions, and the other a commitment to
contribute to the global effort. If this point were generally
accepted by the Parties, there might be a basis for consensus.

The roundtable concluded with a general agreement that there was
no such consensus on JI at this time.

******************************************************************

Cities Complete Local CO2 Inventories

by Philip Jessup, ICLEI

Cities in Canada, the US, Europe, and Turkey recently completed
comprehensive baseline inventories of local CO2 emissions,
revealing striking differences in urban energy patterns among the
three regions. The cities - Toronto, Portland (Oregon),
Minneapolis, San Jose, Denver, Miami, Helsinki, Copenhagen,
Hannover, Saarbrucken, Bologna, and Ankara - have been
participating in the Urban CO2 Reduction Project, an initiative
now two years old sponsored by the International Council of Local
Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI). The Council is a UN-affiliated
association of municipalities worldwide.

The research aims of the Project sought to produce detailed,
comparative baselines and were carried out by technical teams in
each city working with a common protocol. The research provides
the framework for each city's "local action plan" for reducing
CO2 emissions, whose local councils will approve and begin
implementing the plans over the next year.

The first step was to develop a disaggregated breakdown of base
year energy use and CO2 emissions by fuel and end use sector.
From these base year calibrations, the teams generated reference
projections of future emissions, based on local demographic and
economic outlooks. Finally, the teams evaluated CO2 reduction
measures ranging from management of transportation demand to
installation of district heating systems, quantifying their
impact. In order to account for remote emissions 'upstream' of
energy consumption, the project pioneered the use of the TEMIS
"full fuel cycle model", developed by the Oko-Institut in
Germany.

Quantifying energy use and emissions in the transportation sector
presented the most difficult challenge. Municipalities,
preoccupied as they are by traffic congestion, collect mostly
peak traffic data. Furthermore, the urban auto driving cycle,
with its many stops and starts, is a problem to model.

The most important finding of the research is that per capita
energy use goes down as population density goes up. The American
cities in the Project, for instance, have half the population
density of the European cities, but consume upwards of twice as
much energy per capita. The factors that contribute to the lower
per capita energy use in the European cities include:

* the proximity of services and dwellings,

* the higher proportion of row housing and apartment buildings,

* the prevalence of district systems that recycle power
generation waste heat, and

* wider use of public transit, bicycles, and downtown pedestrian
areas.

The inverse relationship between population density and per
capita energy use is especially striking in the transportation
sector. The research found that energy intensity in the American
cities is on average five times greater than in the European
cities. As a result, transportation-related CO2 emissions
predominate in the American cities, whereas emissions are more
evenly distributed among other end uses in the European cities.
The reasons for this gap are deeply rooted in urban form, local
land use patterns, transit system design, and cultural and
behavioral factors.

The research also revealed, however, that car ownership and
transportation-related CO2 emissions are rising fastest in the
European cities and Ankara, Turkey. So the challenge of achieving
"transit friendly" urban development emerged as the most
compelling CO2 reduction issue in all the cities.

These large differences in transportation energy intensity point
towards the important role that municipal governments will need
to play in national CO2 reduction programs. While gains in
automobile efficiency mandated by national standards will reap
quick and obvious results, strong municipal leadership will be
needed to wean people from their automobile dependency through
better land use planning and the provision of public transit
systems, bicycle lanes, pedestrian areas.

Cities in the developing world such as Ankara are likely to
benefit most significantly from new infrastructure investments
that reduce CO2 emissions. Car ownership has jumped 60% over the
past decade in Ankara, resulting in a significant deterioration
in local air quality. A new rapid rail system now being built
will not only reduce traffic congestion and unhealthy air, but
contribute to the city's implementation of its CO2 emission
reduction plan developed under the Project.

******************************************************************

Leman

Leman is relieved to hear he is not the only one at the INC
experiencing visions. Some delegates at Working Group II today
were reporting that their finance ministries were staffed by
little green men from other planets. Others were requesting
divine intervention. Dr. Owen, however, is occupied elsewhere in
the building.

******************************************************************

Editorial

It has become clear that one imperative item has gone unaddressed
- the adequacy of commitments.

During the week the need for additional commitments was raised in
a variety of contexts. Prof. Bolin stressed that no new science
has emerged that weakens the IPCC's statement that a reduction
greater than 60% is required to stabilise the present
concentrations of CO2. Others pointed out that JI must be viewed
in the light of additional commitments. Victim countries voiced
frustration over a process which deals with procedure but
considerably less with substance. It is, as they point out, a
very real problem out there.

Then there is the discrepancy between the objective and
commitments of the convention. Though no reduction figure has
been set for the objective, it is abundantly clear that it will
be considerably higher than the stabilisation of emissions
required by article 4.2.

This calls for a review of the adequacy of commitments and a
simple calculation indicates the urgency: with 50 ratifications
likely by the end of the year, the COP1 would be held at the
latest in March '95. Amendments need to be circulated to the
parties at least six months before COP1, and this means that
adequacy of commitments needs to be discussed at INC9 - INC10
could well be too late.

So how should the INC deal with this? We consider that the answer
lies in one of the interventions made yesterday. Switzerland
considered JI important enough to justify a subsidiary body to
fashion a consensus. A review of commitments is at least as
important. INC8 must therefore give a mandate to either a working
group or body to produce a paper for consideration by INC9. This
will allow the first Conference of Parties to narrow the gap
between the objective and the commitments of the convention.

******************************************************************

Working Group I Report

Joint implementation (JI) encountered further obstacles as major
proponents - the US, Canada, Japan, the Nordic countries,
Australia, and New Zealand - entered the debate, clashing with
members of the G77 and the EC. It was clear the Parties will
leave INC8 having aired their views on JI for the first time, but
with little agreement on when and how to implement it.

The major issue of the session was whether the developed
countries could legally and morally meet part of their
commitments to return their emissions to 1990 levels by the year
2000 through JI projects. Most developing countries saw such
shifts as one more effort by the North to delay or buy their way
out of their 'day of reckoning'.

Canada set the pace by suggesting that all parties may engage in
JI activities to fulfil 1990 commitments as long as they
contribute to real, verifiable, net reductions in emissions.
China noted that participation by non-Annex I countries could
give rise to new obligations not included in the Convention, i.e.
an exchange of carbon credits implies commitments undertaken by
both parties.

The EC countered with a surprisingly strong statement that it
should meet its 1990 commitments at home. In an unusual move, the
Chair of the INC, Ambassador Estrada, delivered a poignant
statement on behalf of Argentina stating that JI will allow those
who have the money to continue to do as they like. He also
introduced the notion, supported later by the French, that
'cost-effectiveness' in Western terms often denies environmental
costs and hidden subsidies.

The much-awaited U.S. statement also endorsed universal
eligibility, as well as application of credits to commitments
prior to the year 2000. (In the later round table debate, the
Head of Delegation assured worried delegates and NGOs that the
primary focus of the U.S. plan will be domestic measures.) Japan
immediately followed with a strong endorsement of JI. Mexico,
which is participating in a project with Norway, broke with the
G77, in a surprisingly pro-JI statement.

Japan also made a recommendation that the INC secretariat develop
an expert technical paper elucidating the issues for INC9, which
was batted about. Ultimately, it was decided that the co-chairs
would draft a summary of the JI debate thus far, which could then
form the basis for future discussion.

Many delegations made suggestions regarding criteria for JI
including:

* separation of JI financial flows from those involving the
Global Environment Facility and existing aid programs;

* 50/50 sharing of the carbon credit in the case of Annex 1 and
non-Annex 1 JI activities;

* that JI should facilitate emissions reductions greater than
each Party would achieve on its own;

* employment of socio-economic impact assessment to determine the
broader effects of JI projects;

After conclusion of this debate, the chair moved on to the last
agenda item, 'First Review of Information'. Depleted if not
somewhat weary, the delegates failed to rise to this dry and
technical matter. After Canada's presentation and circulation of
a 'non-paper' on the subject - and a few half-hearted
interventions - the chair concluded the session early. Maybe a
robust discussion tomorrow on jump-starting a review of
industrial country commitments would liven up the debate.

******************************************************************

Working Group II

The real issues of Thursdays debate focused on who controls the
money and accountability for how its spent. Working Group II
focused debate around the ex-ante review of projects. Not
surprisingly, developed countries were arguing against the COP
having this kind of pre-review authority over the operating
entities' work program. No need for bureaucracy,
double-decision-making or extra work for delegates, they argued.
This is not the way the developing countries felt the process
would work.

The COP is the body which has supremacy over the operating entity
or entities. Based on this, many developing countries felt it was
critical for the COP to have ex-ante review over the work
programs. The interim operating entity, the GEF, is located at
the World Bank. Delegates were not only not thinking up new and
creative possibilities for open, transparent and independent new
operating entities, they actually gave in to the hidden agendas
and used the GEF whenever they spoke of this concept.

The GEF is dominated by the World Bank. The World Bank's voting
system is based on the amount of money a member contributes.
Although developed countries argued that the Participants
Assembly of the GEF is open to 'universal membership', the
reality is, as Brazil pointed out, that the PA has many members
beyond just the parties to the convention. The issue raised is
that control for funding of projects outlined by the Climate
Treaty should be in the hands of the Parties to the convention
only.

Developing countries argued that if the COP does not have ex-ante
review with a regular, outlined reporting procedure, it is likely
that work programs chosen will not necessarily be compatible with
the COP's requirements.

As the delegates finish the first week of work preparing for the
COP, they also have the spectre of the GEF restructuring process
overshadowing their lack of consensus. It is vitally important
that this working group set up a process for review which is
inside of an open, fair and transparent process before the end of
1993, when the GEF will be restructured and replenished. It is
also important that the delegates come to a decision on the
contentious issue of amount of money needed to fund climate
change and mitigation of the effects of global warming. They will
also need to figure out how to collect the funds from the
developed countries who are, after all, the responsible parties.
There is still great hope that Working Group II will live up to
the challenge and make these decisions in order to prevent
business-as-usual and to live up to the spirit as well as the
letter of the convention.

******************************************************************

FOR MORE INFORMATION:

For enquiries and response to ECO:

Eco can be contacted at:

Hotel de Longchamp, 7 rue Butini, 1201 Geneva .
Tel: [phone]. Fax: [phone]

PLEASE NOTE CHANGED REVERSE POLL FAX NUMBERS BELOW!

Dial-a-Fax Service: "Reverse poll" dial to [phone]
(outside UK) or 0336 413706 (inside UK) to receive the latest copy
of ECO. See your fax manual for 'Reverse poll dialing' or call
[phone] for a recorded guidance message. The 336
number is a 'premium' line in the UK only, charged at UKL
0.36/minute cheap rate and UKL 0.48/minute at all other times --
a proportion of this charge supports the ECO project. International
calls are not charged any premium, and are therefore sponsored by
the equipment suppliers.

Every issue of ECO will be posted in full to the en.climate and
climate.news conferences on the APC networks, and the Usenet news
group sci.environment.  It will also be available via anonymous
ftp from IGC.APC.ORG (192.82.108.1), subdirectory /pub/ECO.

Binary PageMaker files are also available via Applelink, on the
APC conference climate.news, and via ftp from IGC.ORG

For information about electronic mail, conference, and ftp
distribution of ECO, contact E-mail coordinator, Lelani Arris
  APC Networks/Internet/Fidonet -   [e-mail]
  Bitnet -                          larris%igc.org@stanford

For information about Pagemaker files via Applelink, contact ECO
staff: applelink:UK.REGION1.

For information about Pagemaker files via APC, contact Media
Natura ECO staff, email: [e-mail]

******************************************************************

CREDITS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:

Editorial & Production Managers: Alister Sieghart and Richard Elen

Production Assistant: Andrew Gettelman

Electronic Distribution: Lelani Arris for EcoNet

North American Distribution: Wes Dowling & EESI

Assistance from: Beth Zilbert, Deborah Good, Karan Capoor, Scott
Hajost, Kalle Hesstvedt, Alden Meyer, Liz Barratt-Brown, Bill
Hare, Phil Jessup, Lyn Goldsworthy and Irving Mintzer

Published by: Media Natura, Tel: [phone], for the Climate
Action Network.

The Climate Action Network would like to thank the following, who
have provided funds and facilities for Eco:

Environmental & Energy Study Institute * Environmental Defense
Fund * National Wildlife Federation * World Resources Institute *
World Wide Fund for Nature * Natural Resources Defense Council *
Climate Network Europe * Swedish NGO Secretariat on Acid Rain *
Union of Concerned Scientists * Greenpeace International *
Rockefeller Brothers Fund

Special thanks to: Hotel Longchamps * UN Nongovernmental Liaison
Service

with resources donated by: Aldus UK, Apple Computer, Creative
Technology Associates, Computers Unlimited, Dial-a-Fax, EcoNet,
Industrade AG, Microsoft, Shades & Characters Ltd.

******************************************************************
PLEASE LET US KNOW IF YOU ARE RECEIVING THIS NEWSLETTER!!

We are interested in tracking ECO electronic distribution. If you
find this newsletter of value, please return the following report.
Thank you for your help!!

******************************************************************
ECO NEWSLETTER - GENEVA AUGUST 1993 (INC 8)

How did you get the newsletter?

_________e-mail _________________________________address
_________conference or list _____________________name
_________ftp or other file server _______________location

Have you used the information in reports or newsletters? (please
specify)

Did you distribute it to others? (please list)

Return to:

******************************************************************
Lelani Arris                            * Project Director
EcoNet:    larris                       * GAIN Sustainable Transport
Internet/Fidonet:  [e-mail]   * & Energy Project (STEP)
BITNET:    larris%igc.org@stanford      * Box 42
Telephone: [phone]                 * Dunster, BC V0J 1J0
Fax:       [phone]                 * Canada
******************************************************************