TL: MEDIA BRIEFING NOTES - THE POLITICS OF CLIMATE CHANGE SO: GREENPEACE INTERNATIONAL, (GP) DT: May 1997 THE FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was established in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) to assess the most up-to-date scientific, technical and socio-economic research in the field of climate change. The (IPCC) has projected that if human interference continues to alter the composition of the atmosphere, average surface temperatures could rise between 2 and 3 øC globally over the next 100 years. This unprecedented rate of climatic change would cause significant damage to ecological systems and economies on a global scale. In response to these climate projections the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (Climate Convention) was adopted by the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee and signed by 162 countries at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992. The Climate Convention is a blueprint for precautionary action against the threat of global climate change. Its ultimate objective is to: `achieve stabilisation of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic (human made) interference with the climate system. Such a level should be achieved within a timeframe sufficient to allow ecosystems to adapt naturally to climate change, to ensure that food production is not threatened and to enable economic development to proceed in a sustainable manner.' The Climate Convention also states that: `Parties should take precautionary measures to anticipate, prevent or minimise the causes of climate change and mitigate its adverse effects'. KYOTO SUMMIT In December 1997 the city of Kyoto, Japan will host the Third Conference of the Parties (COP 3) under the Climate Change Convention. This is a Ministerial level meeting of all parties to the Convention. It is an opportunity for governments to take swift action to cut steadily rising emissions of carbon dioxide - the main greenhouse gas. Greenpeace believes that Kyoto provides an opportunity for politicians to begin the process of setting carbon budgets based on ecological limits, and to initiate steps leading to a negotiated phase out of fossil fuels. The key issues for decision at Kyoto are: * More action agreed: governments have already agreed that commitments under the Climate Convention are too weak to protect the climate and that new agreements to reduce emissions would be agreed at the COP3. Attempts to delay cutting CO2 emissions seriously undermine the ability to prevent dangerous climate change. * Binding emissions reduction targets and timetables: it is essential that new agreements are legally binding, reduce CO2 emissions and set a specific timetable for progressive cuts. Without this there will be no political or market incentives to act. * Precautionary approach: calls for `more science' or more economic analysis before action is taken to protect the climate, runs counter to the precautionary approach. * Same goal for all industrialised countries: there is currently an attempt to have different targets for different industrial countries, often referred to as `differentiation' or `flexibility'. Proposals put forward, for example by Australia, indicate that countries seek a formula where they do least. Greenpeace believes that there is significant untapped potential for energy efficiency, renewable energy and more efficient transport in all industrialised nations and therefore no justification for moving away from a common target for all. * `Historic responsibility': all parties have agreed that industrialised nations must act first, as they have been principally responsible for the 30% increase in CO2 levels since the 1850s. Fossil fuel industry arguments that the main increase in future emissions will come from developing countries, are an obvious attempt to deflect attention away from action to curb current fossil fuel use in the developed world. * Binding policies and measures: measures to speed up the introduction of renewable energy or energy efficiency - like carbon taxation and minimum energy efficiency standards - are opposed by many industrialised countries, despite recognition of the role of energy efficiency in helping to cut CO2 emissions. POLITICS Ministers of all nations, with the exception of fourteen countries (representing the oil exporting nations (OPEC), Australia and Russia ) agreed at COP2 in July 1996, that the latest science conclusions `provide a scientific basis for urgently strengthening action at the global, regional and national levels' (Geneva Declaration). However, despite this important declaration, it is evident from the table at the end, that many industrialised countries support an agenda designed to allow continued exploitation of carbon. In contrast the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) has put forward a blueprint for a legal Protocol containing commitments for industrialised nations of a 20% reduction in CO2 emissions by the year 2005. AOSIS is an alliance of 38 nations vulnerable to the impacts of sea level rise and increases in storm severity resulting from climatic change. KEY Binding Early Same Develope Precauti Binding ISSUES emission action target d onary policies FOR reductio (cuts by for all nations approach and KYOTO n 2005) develope act measures targets d first: and countrie historic timetabl s responsi es bility Australi No No No, No, No, No a differen wants economic t goals more issues between action paramoun ind.nati from t ons developi (Austral ng ia's countrie emission s s would increase ) Canada Yes but Not Not Not Not Not no decided decided clear clear decided detail on targets EU Yes, 15% Yes but Yes, Yes Yes, Yes cut in details uniform keep greenhou on a targets below 2 se gas 2005 degree C emission target warming s by to be 2010, no agreed CO2 in June specific target Japan Yes but Not No, Yes Unclear Yes but not yet decided differen countrie decided t goals s choose on based on which specific per ones s capita emission s N. Yes but Favours No, No, Yes but Possibly Zealand only if `loose differen increasi economic e.g. least mileston tiated ng consider removal cost es' goals developi ations of ng high on fossil country the fuel involvem agenda subsidie ent s Norway Yes No 2010 No, Not Not No timetabl differen clear clear e tiated goals Switzerl Yes - No, 2010 No, Yes Yes No and 10% 2010 timetabl differen for e tiated industri goals al within nations industri as a alised group countrie s US Yes, but No, 2010 Uniform No, Nominall No no is goal for developi y but targets earliest all ng `consist before timetabl nations country ent with 2010 e commitme economic nts prosperi required ty' now INDUSTRY Some of the world's biggest and wealthiest companies attend the international climate negotiations. Using industrial front groups such as the US `Global Climate Coalition' and the `International Petroleum Institute Environmental Conservation Association', companies and associations - such as BP, Exxon, BHP, Chrysler, Dupont - have consistently tried to undermine political action on climate change. These well established industry lobby groups remain united in their efforts to protect the fossil fuel economy in the run-up to COP3 Their efforts to undermine the credibility of climate science and the outcomes of the IPCC resulted in high level condemnation from US Under-secretary for Global Affairs, Tim Worth. The reaction of the lobby groups is now to acknowledge the scientific imperative for action but fail to support binding early CO2 reductions. They have re-focussed on economics, publicising the alleged economic cost to developing countries of CO2 reduction policies implemented by industrialised nations. This is an attempt to counter calls from developing countries for the rich to honour their commitments under the Convention and act first. New business There is an emerging lobby representing companies that not only welcome government action but which call for early reductions in greenhouse gases. The majority are companies either active in industries like energy efficiency and renewables technology, or those which perceive the costs of climate change itself - the insurance industry. The US Business Council for a Sustainable Energy Future, for example, is an organisation of businesses involved in new technology including wind, photovoltaics and fuel cells. It `applauded' the Ministerial Declaration in July 1996, which said governments would negotiate a legally binding agreement by COP3 They stated that `This agreement marks a major economic and environmental opportunity for the US and the world' A group of more than 60 insurers from 23 countries has joined together as the UNEP Insurance Industry Initiative on the Environment. They have called for strong government action to cut greenhouse emissions, insisting that the climate convention negotiations achieve early and substantial reductions in greenhouse gas emissions in accordance with the precautionary principle. GREENPEACE * Greenpeace believes that the first short term legally binding emission reduction should be 20% by the year 2005 relative to 1990 levels for carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. * A 50% reduction must be achieved no later than 2020 and possibly much earlier. * Depending on action to stop deforestation and on the transfer of clean and renewable technology to developing countries, a reduction of around 35-65% by industrialised countries will be needed to avoid dangerous climate changes. For further information please contact the Greenpeace Press Office on 0171-865 8255/6/7/8 or 0171-359 4837