Resource Library: Multimedia/Resource Library: Multimedia.iso/hypertxt/msdos/montanab/jnt.011

Text File | 1993-04-05 | 74KB | 1,616 lines

Subject: Tiempo Issue #6 - Sept. 1992 (74K)

TIEMPO
a bulletin on global warming and the Third World

issue 6  September 1992

published by the International Institute for Environment and
Development (London, UK) and the University of East
Anglia (Norwich, UK)

editorial office:  TIEMPO, c/o Mick Kelly, School of
Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich
NR4 7TJ, UK  (email gn:crunorwich)

in this issue


feature:
A step in the right direction?

forum:
Energy and environment

feature:
Whose Common Future?

interview:
The politics of the environment

conferences:
Details of international conferences

feature:
Sea level rise on China's coastal plains

news:
A Weather Eye on.....
Confronting climate change
Tiempo Resource Service
Latest on the eruption of Pinatubo


************************************************************
EDITORIAL

As the hot air disperses in the aftermath of the Earth
Summit, we begin this issue of TIEMPO with an
assessment of the Framework Convention on Climate
Change. While the fact that the convention exists at all
must be considered a major achievement, it is clear that
there is still a considerable way to go before many critical
issues are resolved, particularly the issue of equity
between North and South, rich and poor.

The attitude of the United States was considered by many
as a substantial block to progress in Rio. Alan Miller
discusses the possible reasons why the Bush
Administration was reluctant to cooperate, including the
influence of the forthcoming Presidential election.

Forum highlights the difficulties facing African nations in
reconciling development needs, specifically the growing
demand for energy, and environmental protection. Thomas,
Sokona and Diallo call for a continent-wide strengthening of
negotiating capacities in order to ensure that alternative
strategies emerge.

Moving from mitigation to adaptation, Han Mukang
considers the potential impact of sea level rise on China's
vulnerable coastal plains, concluding that 73 million people
may be affected. He describes the means by which local
industries and communities have met the cost and dealt
with the environmental consequences of coastal protection.

Finally, Mount Pinatubo has also been contributing hot air
to the Earth's atmosphere in recent months. With global
cooling evident since late 1991, we report on the latest
estimates of the climatic impact of last year's gigantic
eruption.
************************************************************
A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION?

MICK KELLY and SARAH GRANICH of the TIEMPO
editorial team discuss the Framework Convention on
Climate Change.

One hundred years after the Swedish scientist Arrhenius
warned that coal-burning might lead to climate change, it is
time to take stock. The world has warmed by 0.5 C and we
now have a Framework Convention on Climate Change.
But will this treaty help or hinder humanity's response to
the fundamental threat of global warming?

The intensely political process of drafting the convention
has revealed just how far we have to go before a common
future can be guaranteed. The result is a text not so much
characterized by compromise than by an effort to avoid the
resolution of conflicting positions through vagueness and
ambiguity.

The stated objective of the convention is the  stabilization
of greenhouse gas concentrations... at a level which would
prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the
climate system.  This should be achieved  within a time
frame sufficient to allow ecosystems to adapt naturally..., to
ensure that food production is not threatened and to enable
economic development to proceed in a sustainable
manner.

Setting aside the fact that humanity may already have
changed climate beyond the bounds at which  dangerous
interference  is inevitable, the vagueness of this objective
creates ample opportunity for endless negotiation on
subsequent protocols.

As any scientist could have informed the negotiators,
defining a level of global change within which ecosystem
adaptation can occur naturally is near-impossible. Food
production is already threatened by climate change in
many parts of the world who is to decide whether this is
the result of natural or anthropogenic processes? Whose
economic development should be allowed to proceed in a
sustainable manner? And how will  sustainable  be defined.

But it is on the issue of control targets that the convention
is at its most confused and convoluted. The only apparent
indication of an explicit target for the industrialized world is
in Article 4,  Commitments , which at one point refers to
the  aim of returning  [greenhouse gas emissions]
individually or jointly to their 1990 levels.  Careful reading,
though, reveals that the only firm commitment here is that
developed countries should report on progress towards the
end of stabilization not that they should necessarily achieve
this end.

The other reference to stabilization in this section is
curious:  the return by the end of the present decade to
earlier levels of anthropogenic emissions  will  demonstrate
that developed nations are taking the lead in modifying
longer-term trends... consistent with the objective of the
Convention.

Again, there is no firm commitment here but there is
perhaps an implicit recognition of the power of the position
many Third World nations have taken on climate change
limited involvement unless those developed nations with
historical responsibility for the problem take action first. Is
the primary motivation for stabilization on the part of the
industrialized world concern for the planetary environment
or a less than altruistic fear that rising emissions in
developing nations may exacerbate the problem in decades
to come?

In fact, stabilization of fossil carbon emissions may not
prove a particularly convincing achievement as little growth
may occur in many industrialized nations to the end of the
century with or without government intervention. Even if the
OECD nations meet this target, the rate of warming to
2100 will only be reduced by five per cent or so.
Stabilization represents little more than a commitment to
business as usual .

For many of the world's population, though, it is not
controlling greenhouse gas emissions that is the priority but
ensuring adequate protection from the impact of climate
change and sea level rise. Even with drastic cuts in
emissions, global warming is to some degree inevitable.

This point was made many times during the negotiations,
particularly by Third World delegates. That no mention is
made of the importance of facilitating human adaptation in
the stated objective of the convention is a lamentable
deficiency.

Third World delegates also repeatedly stressed their
opposition to the Global Environment Facility (GEF) as the
body responsible for the convention finances. The net
result? Mention of the GEF was shifted from Article 11 to
Article 21 with its role re-presented as an  interim
arrangement .

To be positive, the historic responsibility of the
industrialized nations in creating the problem is
acknowledged in the convention, as is the extreme
vulnerability of the Third World. The challenge faced by
developing nations in ensuring that growth does not
increase their contribution to global warming to an
unacceptable level is recognized. Moreover, the convention
clearly endorses the need for precautionary action
regardless of remaining uncertainties. But the
overwhelming impression is of a document based largely
on the self-interest of the powerful sprinkled with a few
concessions to ensure the compliance of the rest.

There is no evidence that the world's politicians have
understood the true import of climate change and its
implications for the development process. And that is the
main problem with the Framework Convention on Climate
Change. Even a statement of principle alone, with no firm
commitments, would have been preferable if it recognized
the full significance of global warming and provided a clear
agenda for action. As it is, we are left with an ambiguous
document which will allow politicians to fiddle on as the
world steadily warms.

Has the effort expended on developing the climate treaty
been worthwhile? Whatever its limitations, the convention
clearly signals that the world's politicians are taking global
warming seriously whether as a result of genuine concern,
defensiveness or fear. And, however cynical one might be
about the many phrases inserted into the treaty to meet the
demands of special interest groups, the overarching social,
economic and geopolitical issues that climate change
raises have been aired and a forum created in which some
resolution may ultimately prove possible.

The climate treaty represents a tentative first step whether
or not it is a step in the right direction remains to be seen.

BOX:
The following paragraphs are extracted from Article 4 of the
Framework Convention on Climate Change concerning
commitments. They indicate the level of concessions
granted to developing nations. The full text of the
convention can be obtained from the Climate Change
Secretariat, 16 Avenue Jean Trembley, 1209 Geneva,
Switzerland.

7. The extent to which developing country Parties will
effectively implement their commitments under the
Convention will depend on the effective implementation by
developed country Parties of their commitments under the
Convention related to financial resources and transfer of
technology and will take fully into account that economic
and social development and poverty eradication are the
first and overriding priorities of the developing country
Parties.

8. In the implementation of the commitments in this Article,
the Parties shall give full consideration to what actions are
necessary under the Convention, including actions related
to funding, insurance and the transfer of technology, to
meet the specific needs and concerns of developing
country Parties arising from the adverse effects of climate
change and/or the impact of the implementation of
response measures, especially on:
a) Small island countries;
(b) Countries with low-lying coastal areas;
(c) Countries with arid and semi-arid areas, forested areas
and areas liable to forest decay;
(d) Countries with areas prone to natural disasters;
(e) Countries with areas liable to drought and
desertification; (f) Countries with areas of high urban
atmospheric pollution; (g) Countries with areas with fragile
ecosystems, including mountainous ecosystems;
(h) Countries whose economies are highly dependent on
income generated from the production, processing and
export, and/or on consumption of fossil fuels and
associated energy-intensive products; and
(i) Land-locked and transit countries.
Further, the Conference of the Parties may take actions, as
appropriate, with respect to this paragraph.

9. The Parties shall take full account of the specific needs
and special situations of the least developed countries in
their actions with regard to funding and transfer of
technology.

10. The Parties shall, in accordance with Article 10, take
into consideration in the implementation of the
commitments of the Convention the situation of Parties,
particularly developing country Parties, with economies that
are vulnerable to the adverse effects of the implementation
of measures to respond to climate change. This applies
notably to Parties with economies that are highly
dependent on income generated from the production,
processing and export, and/or consumption of fossil fuels
and associated energy-intensive products and/or the use of
fossil fuels for which such Parties have serious difficulties
in switching to alternatives.

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


ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT

JEAN PHILIPPE THOMAS, YOUBA SOKONA and
SOULEYMANE DIALLO discuss the dilemma facing African
nations in attempting to reconcile the demand for increased
energy and protection of the environment.

IT IS generally agreed that action must be taken now to
curb global climate change despite lack of conclusive
scientific data regarding environmental impacts of pollution
from human activities. The North and the South are
confronted with a crisis of unknown proportion. Unless
precautionary measures are taken, the problem may
become insoluble or the costs unbearable.

Posed like this, the problem of environment is limited to the
direct effects  of environmental pollution. For African
countries, however, the problem is much broader, and a
crucial aspect is the relationship between environment and
development.

Energy has played an important role in the growth and
development of Northern nations. At the same time, energy
from exploitation of natural resources to production and
consumption is recognized as a major source of global
environmental degradation.

In African countries, low energy consumption is both
cause and consequence  of our development problems. It
also contributes to environmental degradation (for example,
deforestation). However, if we are to escape from our
present condition of under-development and improve the
living standards of our people, we will need strong energy
growth in the next few decades. What then, of the
environment?

Equally, the struggle against poverty is closely linked to
environmental degradation. If we are capable of mobilizing
against the greenhouse effect, we must be capable, a
fortiori, of mobilizing against poverty.

It should not be surprising, then, that environmental
problems are perceived differently in North and South, with
their different economic and cultural sensitivities, even if
both agree that these problems are inescapable.

It is evident that the Southern  contribution  to global
warming is small compared to that of the North. Common
agreements to limit energy emissions can only be adopted
if they do not constitute a constraint to development in the
South. Thanks to their command of new technologies,
Northern countries are able to adapt as new problems
arise. This is not true for less developed countries. These
often rely on out-moded production techniques (e.g.
electricity) and, as consumers, they constitute no more
than a dumping ground for Northern surpluses (household
appliances) or second-hand goods (automobiles).

As for energy, the current system of production and
consumption is irrational. We certainly wonder at those who
think that a world dominated by the production and
consumption of new, high tech products and low energy
consumption, is sustainable. Such a world would exclude,
ipso facto, those countries who cannot afford such products
until the market is saturated (i.e. when prices drop
sufficiently in the course of the life cycles of products). In
brief, less developed countries are once again relegated to
adopt energy inefficient production technologies and
consumer goods.

Thus it becomes a matter of urgency to organize, as
rapidly as possible, in-depth reflections on an authentic
energy- environment  future, including an analysis of
choices regarding development and society, and of
lifestyles and their implications for the environment. If one
adds demographic considerations (50 per cent of the
population is under 17 years of age in urban and certain
rural areas), it is hard to see how countries that already
have difficulties maintaining their industrial capacity will
meet a quasi-exponential growth in demand. Demand is
expected to grow even though high prices due to inefficient
use of technology will limit many people's consumption.

Only a serious reflection on alternative models, be it in
transport, housing, lighting, etc., will lead to solutions that
may already be available elsewhere. A two pronged study
is needed.

First, taking several examples of successful, systematic
utilization of alternative energies as a base, we need to
look at how these experiences can be extended to a whole
region or country. We also need to ask what Northern
countries could contribute to this extension?

Secondly, to improve the efficiency of existing systems, we
should look beyond national boundaries to see how we can
integrate systems of large-scale hydroelectric and thermal
stations at regional or sub-regional levels, as for example
SADCC (South African Development Conference Council)
or CEDEAO (Communaute Economique et Douaniere des
Etats de l'Afrique de l'Ouest). We should also oppose
isolated national strategies that consist of rehabilitating
obsolete generating facilities and importing second-hand
equipment for energy production and consumption.

African countries should not  mimic  pseudo-linear Northern
development models. Rather, we should be reflecting on an
alternative development model based on the triad:
energy-environment-development. It is our responsibility to
find the political and social capacity to begin to think about
these models. Only by engaging in this reflection will
Southern countries be able to participate as equal partners
in discussions about sharing global environmental
constraints.

If Southern countries refuse for various reasons good or
bad to take action on the environment, reality and
international economic pressure will soon make them
change their minds. This may be another debate, but it
cannot be ignored. In any case, the problem has to be
posed in terms of development: Under what conditions, old
or new, are Northern countries prepared to invest to enable
the South to forego the  obligatory passage  through the
phase of energy-growth correlation? Can we not
collaborate so that this phase can be shortened compared
to what happened in the North?

To what extent is the international community prepared to
regulate greenhouse gas emissions and other forms of
pollution that cause global climate change? If annual
pollution permits  are issued, how will allocation be
organized? Can we think of a system that, beyond this new
right  to pollute, would integrate pricing policies and other
specific mechanisms that would orient production and
consumption in African countries towards more efficient use
of energy? Such mechanisms should be geared to
reducing quantity of energy used for unit of output as well
as improvement of environmental quality.

In other words, how can we convert environmental
constraints into positive factors of development?

We cannot answer the questions posed above with specific
studies on each issue; rather, we must undertake a
participatory, prognostic process of research, education
and action.

That we respond by proposing a method instead of by
making recommendations may seem surprising, but our
experience at ENDA-TM (Environment Development Action
in the Third World) has taught us that, in the end, it is the
only way to raise public awareness about the problems we
face so that people can generate their own solutions.
Participation  in this sense includes as well local
communities in the definition of their energy needs, as
policymakers in the elaboration of energy policy and
development.

To be realistic, our starting point is the simple, well-known
fact that the energy problem in Africa is extremely critical.
Although energy production exceeds use at the continental
level, most countries have a serious energy deficit and vast
regions of Africa depend entirely on human energy or are
threatened with environmental destruction from overuse of
biomass resources.

To address the problem, we first identify quantitative and
qualitative energy needs corresponding to the aspirations
of urban and rural consumers. This requires a preliminary
observation and quantification of consumer behaviour to
ensure objectivity. Unfortunately, most existing
governmental and international studies are based on
partial, scattered, unverified data. By short-cutting this
tedious work, they have advocated measures that, at best,
have little chance of being implemented, and, at worst,
have the opposite effect of what was intended. Examples
of such cases are, alas, numerous. Solid energy demand
surveys are thus essential.

Secondly, we identify and programme energy supplies that
may be used, in ideal circumstances, to satisfy demand.
The  supply  side of the energy equation is usually the
focal point of energy systems. Without underestimating the
importance of supply, we subscribe to an approach that
adapts supply to demand in quantity and quality. Energy
planning, thus, is the result of a confrontation between
supply and demand under multiple possible constraints,
including environmental limits.

Thirdly, we define, in concert with consumers and
policymakers, the appropriate energy policies. Sensitizing
as many policymakers as possible is the ultimate objective
of our activities. This does not happen spontaneously. It is
the result of contacts made in the course of data collection
and seminars on energy-planning, which have created an
active continental network for exchange of energy
information and data.

To conclude, the emergence of development alternatives in
African countries will require a simultaneous strengthening
of negotiating capacities in these countries. In the area of
environment and development, the arguments put forward
above will be more credible if they are defended with the
double-edged sword of imagination and realism.

Dr Souleymane Diallo and Dr Jean Philippe Thomas are
both Senior Research Fellows in the ENDA Energy
Programme. Dr Youba Sokona is Head of the ENDA
Energy Programme. This article was originally published in
the newsletter  of the Climate Network Africa, Impact
(March 1992).

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

WHOSE COMMON FUTURE?

Guidelines for the UN Environmental Conference is the title
of a report published in January 1992 by the influential
American think tank, The Heritage Foundation. Authored by
Christopher Gacek and James Malone, the paper assessed
the implications of the Earth Summit, a process which, they
considered, could  "affect profoundly America's economic
growth, productivity and international competitiveness."
SARAH GRANICH and MICK KELLY consider the attitudes
and misconceptions which underpin this revealing
assessment.

The authors of the Heritage Foundation report set the tone
for their assessment by warning that the Earth Summit  will
be an important test of whether the U.N. is ready to
abandon the "ideologically doctrinaire positions which
paralyzed it for nearly a quarter-century."  They cite what
they perceive as the twin dangers of environmental
regulation based on faulty scientific analysis  and Third
World pressure for increased financing through the World
Bank and other multilateral organizations.

To assist American negotiators at the Earth Summit
(UNCED), the study advanced six  "environmentally sound,
free market goals."

Goal one advised negotiators to  "limit discussions of global
warming. UNCED has the potential for shaping world public
opinion on environmental issues. It thus should restrict
itself to those issues in which it has competence. On global
warming... UNCED expertise and scientific objectivity will
be very limited. UNCED should await the outcome of those
negotiations that the U.N. is conducting specifically to
address this very complicated matter."

Goal two advised "Do not draft a detailed plan for reducing
specific quantities of greenhouse gases by a set date.
Scientific evidence on global warming needs to be more
solid before costly regulations are imposed on the world's
economy. The U.S. should urge the Intergovernmental
Negotiating Committee to study global warming and
examine objectively with sound scientific evidence whether
there is global warming and whether it threatens the
environment."

What is particularly surprising about these two goals is that
the authors appear totally unaware of, or else are
deliberately misrepresenting, the process leading up to the
agreement of a climate convention.

In the first place, objective examination of the evidence on
climate change is not the responsibility of the
Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC). That body
was created with the mandate of drafting a climate
convention and associated protocols. Examination of the
evidence is the responsibility of a separate body, the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Secondly, the IPCC concluded back in 1990 that there was
a clear consensus that climate change presented a serious
threat and it was on this basis that the INC was formed to
negotiate a climate convention to be signed at the Earth
Summit as one of the major UNCED goals. Not only is the
role of the INC and its relation to UNCED misrepresented
but the fact that a scientific consensus already exists is
ignored.

Goal three advised  "Do not address issues dealt with by
other international bodies."  As a general principle, this goal
might be defensible but the authors have a specific matter
in mind.

Citing the danger of going beyond the 1989 Basel
Convention on the transportation of hazardous wastes
across international borders, they observe that " a
transportation ban... would cripple the capability of many
industries around the world that now destroy these wastes
efficiently. [It] would require that hazardous chemicals be
destroyed at their place of production rather than in a
central location. Currently, such materials often are
transported to distant reprocessing sites... If UNCED were
to ban international shipment of hazardous wastes, new
disposal facilities would have to be built, imposing new
costs on national economies. Some production would no
longer remain economically viable and would have to be
stopped."

Of course, what may be considered a distant site to an
American may not be that distant to a Nigerian!

Goal four advised  "promote an understanding of
biotechnology that realistically assesses its risks and
benefits... The world must become more knowledgeable
about biotechnology so that scientific research will not be
impeded by unnecessary regulations. UNCED's New York
and Rio sessions will be a good place for the US to begin
this educational process... The American delegates should
point out that the risks of biotechnology are exaggerated. "

Goal five advised  "protect private intellectual property
rights... Some Third World countries want relaxed
international rules allowing the appropriation of patented
and copyrighted technologies. They claim that this will help
them develop more environmentally safe ways to consume
energy. These countries are using the environmental
argument as a transparent rationale for appropriating
intellectual property... To protect the research investments
of American companies, the U.S. delegates should oppose
strongly any UNCED agreement that undermines protection
of patents, copyrights and other intellectual property
rights... As the world leader in technology, America has an
enormous stake in maintaining the integrity of intellectual
property."

Goal six advised  "oppose UNCED proposals to spend
more money on environmental problems in developing
nations. Funds already set aside at institutions like the
World Bank should be spent on projects that promote
environmentally sound free market reforms... America has
been generous in providing funds to help solve international
environmental problems. Yet the assistance provided by
the US and the other major economic powers cannot
substitute for what developing countries can do themselves
both to spur economic growth and clean the environment.
Third World countries need to create enough wealth of their
own to finance their own environmental programs."

The study concludes with the assessment that "many Third
World delegates will try to... turn UNCED into a forum for
pressuring America and the industrial nations of the West
to adopt costly and highly restrictive regulatory policies to
protect the environment. They will also demand that the
West pay for expensive environmental programs... The US
delegation... should resist these pressures and the
attempts to blame the West for the Third World's
environmental problems. Instead of bureaucratic regulation
of the world economy, the US should press UNCED to
advocate free market solutions to environmental problems.
Only these solutions can clean the environment without
strangling the global economy."

The authors warn that "UNCED could turn into a public
relations frenzy intended to stampede Western countries
into supporting extensive and costly programs calling for
the rapid reduction of specific air emissions as the means
to prevent global warming. To prevent this, the US
delegation must remain firm."

Further information: The Heritage Foundation, 214
Massachusetts Avenue NE, Washington DC 20002, USA.

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

THE POLITICS OF THE ENVIRONMENT

The Earth Summit the United Nations Conference on
Environment and Development (UNCED) held in Rio de
Janeiro, Brazil, in June 1992 was intended to shape the
international response to the myriad problems facing the
world in the late 20th century. According to Maurice Strong,
UNCED Secretary-General, "this process has been a
profoundly human experience from which we cannot
emerge unchanged. The world will not be the same,
international diplomacy and the United Nations will not be
the same and the prospects for the Earth's future cannot
be the same."

But, as Martin Khor of the Third World Network observed,
"the euphoria of having participated in what is regarded as
a historic conference that will change, if not save, the world
is balanced by a nagging sense that not much in substance
and political commitment for action has been achieved."

This feeling was echoed by Gamani Corea, former
Secretary-General of the United Nations Conference on
Trade and Development, who wryly commented that "these
days it is a great achievement to agree on what to say, not
on what to do."

One out of a number of contributing factors hindering the
move from words to action was the attitude taken by the
United States. TIEMPO discusses the US position with
Alan Miller, Executive Director of the Center for Global
Change at the University of Maryland.

TIEMPO: The attitude of the Bush Administration at the
Earth Summit angered and disappointed many people,
making rather a mockery of claims of a new world order. It
would appear that, whatever may have been thought of the
issues themselves, the United States was very suspicious
of the UNCED process, appearing reluctant to give any
indication of support for its overall aims. Is this an accurate
assessment?

The influence of the upcoming US election on Bush
Administration policies cannot be underestimated. While
Bush promised to be  the environmental President  and did
some good things early in his administration, he faced a
serious challenge in the primary elections from the right
wing, isolationist wing of the Republican Party. This is
some of the same crowd that consistently bashes the
United Nations and successfully brought about US refusal
to sign the Law of the Sea Convention after 15 years of
intense negotiations.

Their influence was subsequently confirmed at the August
Republican convention, where speakers repeatedly
criticized the democratic candidate for vice-president,
Senator Gore, as an  environmental extremist . Another
example is a recent interview with former White House
Chief of Staff John Sununu, who said "The whole idea of
the Rio conference was to corner the world leaders,
particularly the president of the United States, in election
year, and to force them to make a decision that, on a more
rational basis, they might not make... this is how the
conference was designed"

In an effort to cater to different political constituencies,
President Bush has also made inconsistent statements
about environmental protection and economic growth. On
the one hand, his speech at Rio emphasized that since the
Stockholm Convention in 1972, the US economy grew by
57% but nevertheless achieved substantial reductions in
pollution. Yet prior to Rio he also announced he would "not
sign a treaty that in my view throws too many Americans
out of work. I refuse to accept that kind of criticism from...
the extremes in the environmental movement."

One of the sad figures in this saga was William Reilly,
Administrator of the US Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA). His efforts to negotiate last-minute changes in the
biological diversity treaty in order to obtain US approval
failed when opponents arranged an embarrassing leak to
the press. In a July memorandum to EPA employees,
Reilly described his experience as "like a bungee jump.
You dive into space secured by a line on your leg and trust
it pulls you up before you smash to the ground. It doesn't
typically occur to you that someone might cut your line!"
One of the more astute observers of US behaviour at Rio
may be Singapore Ambassador Tommy Koh. His
conclusion was that one of the lasting lessons of the
Summit may be never to hold a major international
conference during an American election year.

 TIEMPO: What do you see as the main reasons for the
reluctance to make a firm commitment on climate,
particularly on emissions reduction?

Politics and ideology have a great deal to do with it. Many
American conservatives are irrevocably convinced that
environmentalists are secret Luddites. Richard Darman has
said that  "Americans did not fight and win the wars of the
20th century to make the world safe for green vegetables."
John Sununu, who had enormous influence until his
resignation last December, has said that environmentalists
are looking not so much for energy efficiency as they are to
stop development.

Last year one of the leading free market-oriented think
tanks sponsored a conference featuring global warming
sceptics. I called to ask the organizer about the reason for
his decision to emphasize this perspective. The answer
was revealing; it was, he said, in order to counteract the
bias of left-wing groups pushing global warming solely as
an excuse for advancing more government control of the
economy. Lest this be treated as a bizarre exception, I
hasten to add that I have subsequently heard and read this
perspective from many others.

The Administration's politics also reflect the influence of the
fossil fuel industries, particularly the oil and coal producers.
American business interests are divided on global warming;
a coalition of efficiency, gas, and renewable energy
companies even wrote to the President urging his
participation at Rio and support for limits on greenhouse
gases. Their views were obviously rejected.

In contrast, assertions by US officials that the issue was
simply an unwillingness to agree to goals without knowing
how to reach them are totally unconvincing. Four years
ago, the President promised 15 million new jobs without
any serious idea of how such a goal could be
accomplished (and in fact employment grew hardly at all).
The President announced other heroic goals during his
administration, including a commitment to make US
students first in the world in science and mathematics by
the year 2000.

TIEMPO: It's ironic that most of the world's experts on
global warming are based in the United States, yet the
Administration acts as though its scientific advisors are
ignorant of the current level of scientific understanding
specifically, making far more of the remaining uncertainties
than is warranted. Why is it that the scientific community in
the United States has failed to get its point across? Do you
consider that the stance of the Bush Administration has
been influenced to any great extent by the  greenhouse
critics ? Or are they just adding noise to the debate?

The Administration has used scientific uncertainty as a
calculated weapon to undermine the case for action. There
is no recognition that uncertainty cuts both ways and that,
as the ozone depletion experience demonstrates, the
problem may be worse as well as less than currently
predicted. There is also a failure to distinguish between
more information, which we will surely have every year,
and better understanding, which cannot be predicted. We
have spent billions on cancer research and know much
more about its many forms, but we have not improved the
life expectancy in every case.

There are other factors at work. The size of the US
scientific community arguably mitigates against the
expression of strong consensus opinions. As most funding
is in one way or another from public sources, scientists are
rightly concerned that becoming outspoken may jeopardize
their support. Jim Hansen, who first suggested that the
temperature record substantiates a greenhouse warming in
1988 testimony before Congress, later had to resist a
highly publicized effort to censor a subsequent
Congressional appearance.

The culture of science also naturally accepts scepticism
(sometimes even when ill-founded) while questioning the
motives of scientist-advocates. Dr Sherwood Rowland
suffered enormous abuse for his public advocacy of
restrictions on ozone depleting compounds. His character
and research record were strong enough that he not only
survived but received numerous scientific awards. Others
are not as courageous.

I would also argue that the US scientific community is
relatively undivided in its opinions through the National
Academy of Sciences, the IPCC, and other forums. As
Jerry Mahlman of the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics
Laboratory has said: "These findings about the greenhouse
effect are extremely sound, but many groups don't want to
hear the science. They only want their preconceived
notions to be validated."

TIEMPO: Much has been made of the economic cost of
reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Do you think that this
concern is warranted?

There is a lot of bad science coming from economists but
even more bad economics coming from scientists and
politicians. There are countless studies by impeccable
sources demonstrating that US emission reductions could
be reduced 20% or more at low cost or even with savings.
The ozone depletion experience also argues for this belief
as alternatives were developed rapidly, and costs dropped,
once a policy decision was made that CFCs would be
phased out.

There are a lot of vested interests in the fossil fuel
industries and the government is willing to do studies for
the purpose of showing that costs could be high. It takes
no great genius to construct an economic model to show
doing something differently than we are doing today will
divert dollars from more constructive purposes resulting in
damage to the economy. The interesting analysis is to look
at how these costs could be reduced or eliminated, yet this
approach is counter to the desired political result and is
therefore simply ignored or dismissed.

It also never ceases to amaze me that people unwilling to
accept climate models will put such faith in economic
models that cannot meet comparable burdens of proof.

TIEMPO: With elections due later this year, do you see any
prospect for change?
The implications of the election are enormous. There is the
possibility some would say probability that we will go from
an environmental disaster to one of the strongest
environmental administrations in American history. Certainly
Al Gore has an unprecedented understanding of global
environmental issues and international politics.

Unfortunately, American politics have been so mired in the
need to respond to conservative leaders that we may be ill-
prepared to respond quickly and creatively to this
opportunity. We should remember the experience of the
Carter Administration, when a strong EPA was unable to
overcome fossil fuel interests in the Department of Energy
and the White House despite a sympathetic President. We
also face new fiscal realities due to the US$3 trillion deficit.

TIEMPO: It is, perhaps, unfair to judge a whole nation on
the basis of its national politicians.  Are attitudes different
at the state, community and individual level?

Some of the most innovative policy initiatives have come
from state capitals and from industry. Several utility
companies have already made commitments to reduce
their carbon emissions. The state of Minnesota has been
developing a policy to tax utilities enough to pay for tree
planting offsets. Maryland adopted a sales tax on new cars
that varies with energy efficiency. Several states have done
assessments of how they might be affected by global
warming and what they can do to mitigate the impacts. At
the Center for Global Change we have a review of
innovative policy from the states called Cool Tools that I
will be glad to provide to your readers upon request.

Further information: The Center for Global Change has
kindly agreed to make copies of Cool Tools available free
to southern subscribers to TIEMPO while supplies last. The
address to write to is on page 25.

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

CONFERENCES

Role of Regional International Organizations in the Context
of Global Warming
Paris, France: 05-10-92 to 08-10-92
Subtitled a NATO Advanced Research Workshop, the
workshop is aimed at resource managers, social scientists
and international law experts. With increasing interest in
policy circles about the consequences of global warming,
the intent is to assess regional policy options and the role
of regional organizations under conditions of environmental
change. Details: M H Glantz, ESIG, NCAR, PO Box 3000,
Boulder, Colorado 80307, USA.

Mountain Environments & Changing Climates
Davos, Switzerland: 11-10-92 to 16-10-92
Co-sponsored by WMO, the Swiss Meteorological Institute
and the American Meteorological Society amongst others.
Will include invited speakers, oral presentations and panel
sessions intended to stimulate discussions. Conference will
bring together climatologists, biologists, hydrologists and
ecologists to discuss various aspects of mountain
environments in changing climates. Details: Dr Martin
Beniston, ProClim, National Institute for Climate and Global
Change, PO Box 7613, CH-3001, Bern, Switzerland.

Environmental Consciousness & the Mass Media
Dresden, Germany: 14-10-92 to 17-10-92
An international congress planned for scholars, scientists,
media professionals and environmental activists to examine
means through which environmental issues shape the
public consciousness. Main themes to include mass media,
North-South and East-West environmental dialogue, and
identifying environmental problems in the public
consciousness. Details: Patrick Wilkinson, Deutsches
Hygiene-Museum, Lingnerplatz 1, DO 8010 Dresden,
Germany.

Biotic Feedbacks in the Global Climatic System
Woods Hole, USA: 25-10-92 to 29-10-92
International workshop organized by the Woods Hole
Research Center as part of the IPCC review process
contributing to the Second Assessment Report in 1995.
Aim is to review prospects for incorporating biotic
feedbacks into climatic prediction. Primary focus is on
carbon dioxide and methane but other greenhouse gases
will also be discussed. Details: Shelagh Varney, IPCC/WG1
Secretariat, Hadley Centre, Meteorological Office, London
Rd, Bracknell RG12 2SY, UK.

Supercities: Environmental Quality and Sustainable
Development
San Francisco, USA: 26-10-92 to 30-10-92
Will act as a forum on Supercities of the Pacific Rim as
focal points of environmental conditions, quality of life, their
use of natural resources and their impacts on sustainable
development. Details: Noreen Dowling, Conference
Coordinator, National Institute for Global Environmental
Change, 1477 Drew Avenue, Suite 104, Davis, CA
95616-8756, USA.
Applications and Prospects of Biotechnology for Arid and
Semiarid Lands Lubbock, USA: 05-11-92 to 07-11-92
An international conference intended to evaluate local,
regional and international strategies for biotechnology
developments for drought- adapted plants. Topics for
discussion will include adaptations to arid environments,
disease resistance of drought-adapted plants and
alternative crops and desert medicinal plants. Details: Arid
Lands Conference, RGK Foundation, 2815 San Gabriel,
Austin TX 78705-3594, USA.

Managing the Mediterranean
Venice, Italy: 17-11-92 to 19-11-92
A three-day workshop with the intent of providing
information for decision making. Subjects for discussion will
include the necessity for a cooperative system, such as a
consortium of information centres and data banks that will
link organizations, scientific and decision makers and
monitoring and archive networks for the Mediterranean
environment. Details: International Centre Cities on Water,
San Marco 875-30124, Venice, Italy.

Third Technical Conference on Meteorological Research in
Eastern & Southern Africa
Arusha, Tanzania: 30-11-92 to 04-12-92
Conference will focus on research in the region to
complement the activities of the Drought Monitoring
Centres of the region. Papers are called for from regional
scientists on such topics as climatology and data
management, energy- related issues, climate change
issues and remote sensing. It is intended that a
proceedings volume will be produced. Details: W S M
Minja, Directorate of Meteorology, PO Box 3056, Dar es
Salaam, Tanzania.

First International Conference of the African Meteorological
Society on Recent Climate Anomalies
Nairobi, Kenya: 07-12-92 to 11-12-92
Conference intends to address current concerns on climate
variability and climate change and their relationship to
environmental degradation. Will also consider climatic
impacts on all aspects of socio-economic activities such as
agriculture, water resources and the rational use of energy.
Details: Stephen Njoroge, Chairman, Local Organizing
Committee, PO Box 30259, Nairobi, Kenya.

Technical Conference on Tropical Urban Climates
Dhaka, Bangladesh: 11-01-93 to 16-01-93
Conference intends to focus attention on issues relating to
the Tropical Urban Climate Experiment initiated by the
WMO Commission for Climatology. Themes to be
discussed include the impact of climate and weather on
urban fabric, structures and operations; impact of urban
activities on climate on local, regional and global scales;
and application of climate information and knowledge in
urban planning, building and operations. Details: Secretary-
General, WMO, Case Postale 2300, CH-1211, Geneva 2,
Switzerland.

Convention on Biological Diversity:
National Interests and Global Imperatives
Nairobi, Kenya: 26-01-93 to 29-01-93
International conference addressing topics such as national
sovereignty, developments in international environmental
law, access to biological diversity, technology transfer,
research, training, education and public awareness. Details:
Calestous Juma, ACTS, PO Box 45917, Nairobi, Kenya.

XVII International Grassland Congress
Palmerston North, New Zealand: 08-02-93 to 21-02-93
Four climate change sessions will examine the likely impact
on grassland ecosystems, prediction of effects on plants
and their biotic environment, adaption of grassland to
climate change, and the role of grassland agriculture in
modifying climate change. Details: Bruce Campbell, DSIR
Grasslands, Private Bag 11008, Palmerston North, New
Zealand.

Third Global Warming Science and Policy International
Conference
Chicago, USA: 05-04-93 to 08-04-93
Main objective of the conference is to report on the impacts
of UNCED, providing an international forum on the scientific
and policy issues facing governments with regard to the
greenhouse effect and similar transnational environmental
problems. Details: Sinyan Shen, Natural Resource
Management Division, SUPCON International, One
Heritage Plaza, Woodbridge, IL 60517-0275, USA.

International Conference on Science and Technology in
Third World Development
Glasgow, Scotland: 05-04-93 to 07-04-93
Organized by the Third World Science, Technology and
Development Forum (STD Forum), the conference will
include participants from both developing and Western
countries. Discussion topics will include technology and the
environment, technology transfer and international
organizations and new sciences and technologies. Details:
Richard Heeks, Programme Secretary, STD '93, Institute
for Development Policy and Management, University of
Manchester, Precinct Centre, Manchester M13 9QS, UK.


Climate Change, Natural Disasters & Agricultural Strategies
Beijing, P R China: 26-05-93 to 29-05-93
An international symposium intended to review the studies
of climate change impacts on agriculture, forests, sea level
rise, land use and other human environmental factors.
Aims include exchange of ideas, views and techniques
about how best to forecast and mitigate these disasters
and to promote international cooperation in environmental
protection. Details: Professor Lu Guangming, Beijing
Agricultural University, 100094 Beijing, P R China.

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

SEA LEVEL RISE ON CHINA'S COASTAL PLAINS

HAN MUKANG discusses some of the critical problems in
the current state of research concerning sea level rise in
China.

TWO ASPECTS of the impact of global warming will
particularly affect China's coastal environment, according to
current research. First, accelerated sea level rise will
inundate a vast coastal area causing both saltwater
intrusion and coastal erosion. Second, any intensification of
typhoon activity, which may be coupled with a migration of
typhoon tracks in a northward direction, will have serious
consequences.

Accelerated sea level rise has been clearly found along the
coast of China. Based on data from a number of tidal
stations in different geologic and tectonic settings, the State
Oceanological Bureau of China announced in March 1989
that the sea level along China's coast had risen 11.5cm in
the past 100 years, averaging 2.3mm a year in recent
decades (1950-1980).

The rise was found to be greater along the low-lying
coastal plains. For example, sea level rose at an average
of 3mm a year in the years from 1954 to 1978 along the
Pearl River delta plain and almost 6mm a year between the
years 1962 to 1981 along the North China plain near
Tianjin. Faster sea level rise can also be observed along
the East China coastal plain near Shanghai.
The localized acceleration in sea level rise along these
plains is due to both tectonic subsidence and excessive
groundwater extraction. For example, land settlement
caused by groundwater extraction has exceeded 2m in the
downtown areas of Tianjin and Shanghai over the past
thirty years.

There are still questions to be resolved concerning past
rates of sea level rise. Different authors have presented
varying estimates even based on the same data. The
reasons for these discrepancies include: different methods
of calculation; estimation based on different numbers of
tidal stations and periods of data; insufficient consideration
of local and complex factors such as land subsidence
caused by tectonic movements and groundwater
overpumping.

There is also debate over the evidence of past changes in
typhoon activity. It has been reported that there has been a
northward shift in typhoon landing sites since the 1970s
and that the possible cause of this shift is global warming.
However, analysis by the author of data for the period
1939-90 has not confirmed this conclusion.

Accurate predictions of the future rate of sea level rise
along the coastline of China, taking into account all factors
including local geological and tectonic conditions, are not
yet available. At present, the best way to research the
impact of sea level rise in coastal areas is to presume a
one metre rise without a given timescale. This suggestion
is supported by the IPCC's projected one metre global sea
level rise over the next century. But the most realistic
problem to which greater attention must be paid is that a
one metre rise would be reached much earlier along
coastal areas suffering from intense tectonic subsidence
and/or groundwater overpumping.

A one metre rise in sea level would present a serious
threat to China's coastal regions in both physical and
socio-economic terms. Many of China's most important
cities have coastal sites and almost 55% of the nation's
gross national production comes from coastal areas. The
coastal low-lying plains make up one-fifth of China's coastal
area, with some of the largest cities (such as Shanghai,
Guangzhou and Tianjin) located at either the level of high
tide or even lower. Every year, typhoon-driven surges
cause additional flooding, sometimes by as much as a 1.5
to 3m rise, intensifying further the threat of sea level rise.
The situation is aggravated by groundwater overpumping
and land subsidence.

The protective measures necessary to deal with sea-water
flooding can be observed in the downtown area of
Shanghai. Over the past forty years, the doorways of many
old buildings have been equipped with special vertically
movable or laterally sliced gates. The street windows of
basements have been blocked up and the anti-flooding
walls along the river banks and coastline have been raised
two to three times. The Guangzhou downtown area with
the city's busiest commercial streets is sited along the
banks of the Pearl River. Over the past twenty years, this
part of the city has frequently become inundated due to
high tides, river flooding or typhoon-driven surges.

If the projected one metre sea level rise is reached and the
coastal area is not protected, serious consequences would
ensue.

First, a vast area, much larger than expected, would be
inundated. The areas located lower than the four to five
metre contour line (depending on the height of maximum
high tide and storm surge level) in China's four largest and
richest low-lying plains would be entirely drowned.

The areas at risk include the whole of the Pearl River
deltaic plain with Guangzhou, the eastern half of the East
China coastal plain with Shanghai, the eastern half of the
North China coastal plain with Tianjin, and the southern
half of the Lower Liaohe River plain with Yingkou.

The area of these four coastal plains which would be
inundated amounts to around 92,000 sq km. This is an
area larger than that of Austria (83,849 sq km) or two
Netherlands in total (2 x 40,884 sq km). The population
that would be affected is around 67.05 million, more than
the whole of France (54.62 million in 1985) or the United
Kingdom (56.13 million in 1985).

If one also takes into account the varying widths of the
coastal zone and the patches of small delta that would be
flooded in the mountainous regions, the total area
vulnerable to inundation could be greater than 125,000 sq
km and the total population affected could be more than 73
million.

Second, the severe saltwater intrusion already manifest on
the North China coastline near the city of Canzhou 190km
west of the present Bohai Sea shoreline and in the coastal
area of Laizhou Bay would be exacerbated.
Finally, coastal erosion would become even worse. There
is already a severe problem due to a lack of sediment
caused by the damming of rivers, the setting of tidal gates
at river mouths without frequent opening, and the mining of
beach sands. The famous Baidaihe Coastal Resort Zone
near the eastern terminal of the Great Wall on the west
coast of the Hohai Sea, which includes valued bathing
beaches, would be entirely swept away.

It is clear that the only realistic and appropriate
counter-measure to sea level rise on these plains is to
raise and consolidate the existing dykes which have been
built in an almost continuous span along the whole coast,
to build auxiliary constructions (such as pumping facilities)
and to undertake an integrated, comprehensive re-planning
of coastal cities and regions.

One problem, though, arises. To build dykes and related
facilities over a long distance to protect against sea level
rise requires large funds. These worries have been
highlighted at IPCC international and regional meetings.
Discussions have focused on how such large expenses
would affect the economic development of a region or a
nation, and whether these expenses could be sustained
within a local or regional financial capacity.

Chinese practice has provided a favourable answer. With
its own finances, an oil field administration on the Yellow
River delta recently built a large dyke at the Yellow River
mouth for the safety of the oil field. This dyke is designed
to protect against a one hundred year storm surge. It is
rubble concrete, built on the muddy flat at 1m altitude, and
is 108km long, 5m high with a bottom width of 38m and a
top width of 10m used as a highway. The dyke cost a total
of 400 million Chinese Yuan (about US$74 million). This is
equivalent to only about four-fifths of the annual output
value of one of the refineries in this particular oil field. The
unit cost of such a dyke is 4 million Chinese Yuan
(US$0.74 million) per kilometre.

Another active example is provided by a large state-run
alkaline chemical enterprise on the Laizhou Bay coastal
plain south of the Bohai Sea, which has recently completed
a gigantic dyke of 204km length along the entire bay
coastline at its own expense.

The construction of high dykes along the coastline does
present environmental management with another problem
though. How to effectively treat the large area of low-lying
land located behind the dykes which suffers from
salinization and frequent water logging? This problem has
been more or less solved by Chinese practice in the lower
reaches and deltaic area of the Yellow River.
The Yellow River possesses a high concentration of
sediments and its channels are constrained by dykes
located 4-8m higher than the land behind the dykes. The
local people have diverted the water with the rich
sediments from the Yellow River into the low-lying area
through the use of sluices and additional canals. The fertile
sediments settle and the height of the area is raised by one
to two metres through several such diversions in two to
four years. After every diversion, the local people can
cultivate this fertile land and obtain good harvests without
the need for irrigation or fertilization.

While effective, it must be recognized that these practices
are the result of local enterprises and communities dealing
with their own immediate problems. Despite the warnings
of scientists concerning the need for appropriate response
strategies to deal with future sea level rise, an
overwhelming majority of local government decision
makers, urban planners and environmental officers are still
not aware of the need to consider potential impacts and to
devise response strategies.

Professor Han Mukang is with the Department of
Geography at Peking University. This article has been
extracted by the Tiempo editorial team from the paper
"Impact of Global Warming on China's Coastal
Environment", presented at the International Seminar on
Climate Change Impacts, Beijing, August 31st to
September 1st 1991. Professor Han Mukang is co-author
of two relevant papers to  be published in the Journal for
Coastal Research, December 1992: "The Adverse Impact
of a Projected One Metre Sea Level Rise on China's
Coastal Environment and Cities: A National Assessment"
and "The Adverse Impact of a Projected One Metre Sea
Level Rise on the North China Coastal Plain: A Case
Study". His research is part of an international project
sponsored by the Center for Global  Change, Maryland,
USA.

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

A WEATHER EYE ON.....

Weather Eye this issue presents a selection of comments
and views that were heard at or about the United Nations
Conference on Environment and Development in Rio.

STRONG WORDS...
We have yet to see the degree of commitment from
governments to the principles of the Earth Summit, but the
UNCED Secretary-General, Maurice Strong, was optimistic
on the eve of the conference. He declared that, to ensure
global security, a cost-effective investment would be to help
the developing world revitalize their economies and combat
poverty which he described as not only  morally repugnant
but destructive to the environment. Realistically, he said, he
did not expect the commitment of governments to come all
at once. The final test would be the extent to which
governments actually carried out the commitments.

BIRDS OF A FEATHER...
Prevention is the best solution to the global warming threat,
but politically it will not happen,  concluded Michael Glantz
of the Environmental and Societal Impacts Group in
Boulder, USA. He described his view of political reactions
in terms of:
o    ostriches: political leaders who, like this bird, bury their
head in the sand. They do not care about global warming
or its effects. President Bush is the greatest ostrich who
will be at UNCED;
o    hawks: global warming is happening now and they
point to ecological catastrophe as proof; and
o    doves: they are sceptical, nothing will happen that
nature can't absorb.

YOUR TREE OR MINE?...
The issue of sovereignty came to the fore in the debate on
forest protection. Kamal Nath, India's environment minister,
stated the position of many Third World nations: "We
oppose a convention on forests. We will not discuss
international scrutiny of our forests... Trying to globalize
forests is like saying that oil is a global resource. You can't
tell us what to do with our forests so you can run your cars
in Los Angeles."

But the pithiest comments came from Malaysia. Jing Wen
Lian, spokeswoman on forests, was adamant: "Our forests
are not global commons they are national resources. I don't
say that North Sea oil or Alaskan gold should belong to the
global community. Why do you claim our forests?... Oceans
play a far more important role as sinks for carbon dioxide,
but nobody talks about protecting the marine ecosystem.
And what about temperate and boreal forests?... By no
stretch of the imagination are we going to keep our forests
in custody for some other nation."

Obviously,  concluded Prime Minister Mahathir bin
Mohammed,  "the North wants to have  a direct say in the
management of forests in the poor South at next to no cost
to themselves."

A RELUCTANT PARTICIPANT...
The United States came in for much criticism over its
attitude at the Earth Summit. Forced into the defence even
before the conference began, President Bush made his
position clear.  "No other nation has done more more
rapidly to clean up the water, the air, or preserve public
lands. No other nation has done more to advance the state
of technology that promises cleaner growth. No other
nation has put in place stricter standards to curb pollution
in the future... But let me say up front: I am determined to
protect the environment. I am also determined to protect
the American taxpayer. The day of the open chequebook is
over... environmental protection and a growing economy
are inseparable... For the past half century, the US has
been the great engine of global economic growth, and it's
going to stay that way. Every American knows what that
means for us... What many may not know is that the world
also has a stake in a strong American economy... Right
now, one half of the developing countries' exports of
manufactured goods to all industrialized countries are sold
in the United States."

Later, he added in less coherent fashion:  "I have nothing
to be apologetic for. I also have to be the one at this
conference that is responsible for jobs and people being at
work."

Stressing that the United States would lead in protecting
the world's forests so that biodiversity can be maintained
he said,  "We think that a good forestry programme will
take care of a lot of the... biodiversity needs. And so
though I will not sign that treaty as it sits on the table now,
we will continue to be the leader, or a leader, in terms of
forests and in terms of environmental technology."

But change may be in the air. Al Gore, US
Vice-Presidential candidate, commented that  "it's like a
Greek tragedy. Everyone can see it coming. The only thing
left is for him to invite the executives of a few coal
companies to come along with him."

At least, after much prevarication, Bush did attend the
Earth Summit for 24 hours. Others were so disgusted at
the likely lack of progress that they didn't go at all.
Environment Commissioner for the European Community,
Carlo Ripa di Meana, pulled out, explaining that  the Earth
Summit has been betrayed before it has begun.  Known as
the  Grim Reaper  because of his hard line on
environmental regulation, he resigned from his position
shortly afterwards.

FINALLY...
The Global Environment Facility (GEF) was the subject of
much controversy. Malaysian delegate, Renji Sathiah,
expressed the widely-held view that the Facility  was forced
down our throats  as a source of funding for the
implementation of the climate convention.

And there was much discussion of the forthcoming
restructuring of the fund. Dutch Development Cooperation
Minister, Jan Van Pronk, argued that it should be
restructured to  guarantee that the donor countries could
not impose their views.

Criticizing the attitude of many northern donors towards aid
and assistance, Van Pronk observed that capitalism  "... is
not the system, not the sole system, it is not even the only
possibility to speed up economic development... We need a
paradigm that is not capital-oriented but man- and
nature-oriented, and which is much less material
consumerism-oriented."

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

CONFRONTING CLIMATE CHANGE

A JOINT SEMINAR, Global Issues in Energy and Climate
Change, was organized at the Global Forum in Rio de
Janeiro on June 5th by the Stockholm Environment
Institute (SEI) and the Tata Energy Research Institute
(TERI).

The aim of the seminar was to provide an opportunity to
discuss and consider energy use in the context of
sustainable development, how climate change should be
confronted and on what issues the climate convention and
associated protocols should be framed and judged.

The discussion was wide-ranging, covering energy and
sustainable development, responses to climate change,
technology, economics, equity, alternative strategies,
political issues and targets and timetables.

The participants issued the following statement at the end
of the seminar:  "Despite decades of intense debate,
present trends in energy supply and use in industrialized
and developing countries will lead to significant increases in
emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.
Against this background, discussions stressed that it was
essential that a clear and unambiguous climate convention
confronts the issue by setting out a clear schedule for
limitation targets that share the burden of reductions in an
equitable way. Development aspirations of the poorer
countries cannot be ignored; the developing countries must
not be saddled with unrealistic expectations for action
related to the climate convention. For any real progress to
be made, resource transfers to the less well-endowed
countries will be essential and should be clearly committed
in the convention. Also, efforts and resources must focus
on local capacity building by strengthening
energy/environment institutions in the developing
countries."

"High and wasteful resource consumption cannot be
sanctioned in the context of a climate convention: energy
saving, natural resource protection, and economic
measures to ensure resource use efficiency and reduction
of resource use intensity are available and could be
implemented in all countries. This will require international
will and national commitment and would release resources
for effective development. Agreements for the stabilization
and reductions of greenhouse gases need a well-tested,
independent monitoring system in place to chart progress.
A framework for such a monitoring procedure exists and
should be refined and established as part of the activities
accompanying a convention."

SEI launched two new books at the seminar: Confronting
Climate Change and World Energy: Building a Sustainable
Future. TERI released a special Earth Summit issue of
their journal Pacific and Asian Journal of Energy.
Further information: For details of the publications
mentioned above, write to the addresses given on page 25.

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

CONTACT ADDRESSES

iMPACT, Climate Network Africa, PO Box 21136, Nairobi,
Kenya.
Dr A Miller, Center for Global Change, University of
Maryland at College Park, Suite 401, 7100 Baltimore
Avenue, College Park, MD 20740, USA.
Professor Han Mukang, Department of Geography, Peking
University, Beijing, P R China
Stockholm Environment Institute, Jarntorget 84, Box 2142,
S-103 14 Stockholm, Sweden.
Tata Energy Research Institute, 7 Jor Bagh, New Delhi 110
003, India.
Drs J P Thomas, Y Sokona and S Diallo, Energy
Programme ENDA, 54 rue Carnot, BP 3370, Dakar,
Senegal.

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

TIEMPO RESOURCE SERVICE

The Tiempo Resource Service supplements the material
published in each issue of the bulletin. Southern
subscribers can obtain the following resources at no charge
by writing to the address below. Northern subscribers can
obtain copies by sending a donation to cover costs.
o    A listing of newsletters on global warming and the
Third World (ref. 1/1).
o    A listing of key references on the global temperature
record (ref. 1/2).
o    A listing of references covering assessment of the
allocation of responsibility (ref. 1/3).
o    A listing of key references on sea level rise and small
islands (ref. 2/1).
o    A transcript of the speech given by Prime Minister
Paeniu of Tuvalu in London, 19th March 1991 (ref. 2/2).
o    A report on the International Conference on Impacts of
Climate Change and Sea Level Rise, Hanoi, Vietnam,
9-10th November 1991 (ref. 3/1).
o    A listing of key references on energy and climate (ref.
3/2).
o    A listing of the latest IPCC global temperature record
(ref. 4/1).
o    The full text of the AOSIS proposal for a Sea Level
Rise Insurance Pool (ref. 4/2).
o    A reprint of the full text of the article, The Case Against
Climate Aid,  from the Ecologist (ref (5/1).
o    A listing of references on water harvesting and
irrigation (ref 5/2).
o    A listing of references on volcanoes and climate (ref
6/1).
o    The Center for Global Change has kindly agreed to
make Cool Tools available free to southern subscribers to
Tiempo while supplies last. See adjacent box for address.

Further information: To receive these resources, write to
Sarah Granich, TIEMPO, 47 Wellington Rd, Norwich NR2
3HT, United Kingdom.

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

LATEST ON THE ERUPTION OF PINATUBO

GLOBAL COOLING of at least 0.5 C is now being
predicted as a result of the June 1991 eruption of Mount
Pinatubo in the Philippines. The latest analyses suggest
that greenhouse warming may be offset for a couple of
years while the atmosphere clears.

According to Pat McCormick of the NASA Langley
Research Center, Pinatubo injected as much dust and gas
into the atmosphere as the famed eruption of Krakatoa in
1883. Pollution levels in the upper atmosphere, the
stratosphere, have increased by 60 to 80 times. The result
has been a warming of the stratosphere by between 3 and
3.5 C.

Acid droplets created by the eruption absorb radiation
entering the atmosphere from the Sun, warming the high
atmosphere where the pollution may persist for some
years. The Earth's surface cools as the volcanic aerosols
scatter sunlight away from the ground.

Jim Hansen and colleagues at the NASA Goddard Space
Flight Center have used their climate model to predict the
impact on global surface air temperature.

Forecasting a maximum cooling of about 0.5 C with effects
lasting for up to three years, the modellers conclude that
Pinatubo  "may... delay by several years the time at which
global warming becomes obvious."

It has been suggested that the eruption may provide an
effective test of the models used to predict global warming.
Cooling has been observed since the eruption but it could
prove difficult to separate out the effects of Pinatubo from
the many other causes of natural climate variability.

END END END END END END END END END END END


******************************************************************
Lelani Arris                            * Project Director
EcoNet:    larris                       * EcoNet Energy & Climate
Internet/Fidonet:  [e-mail]   * Information Exchange
BITNET:    larris%igc.org@stanford      * Box 1061
Telephone: [phone]                 * Jasper, Alberta T0E 1E0
Fax:       [phone]                 * Canada
******************************************************************