ECO GENEVA (INC) #3 June 20, 1991 ( 
Author Message
 ECO GENEVA (INC) #3 June 20, 1991 (

From: <larris>
Subject: ECO GENEVA (INC) #3 June 20, 1991 (47K)

                          ECO NEWSLETTER

               CLIMATE CHANGE NEGOTIATIONS - GENEVA

                          June 20, 1991
                             Issue #3

                        TABLE OF CONTENTS

1)  'Prevent Climate Holocaust' - Greenpeace
2)   New Publication from Climate Action Network
3)   Conference Meets for Under 30 Minutes
4)   Report from Brazil
5)   The Amazon - Proposal to Minister Garcia
6)   Science: Who do you Believe? (by Jeremy Leggett)
7)   Aedenate IU Presentan un Plan Energetico Alternativo
8)   California's New Climate Change Policy
9)   Climate Issues in Malaysia
10)  Lessons from Montreal Protocol
11)  Lman's Chateau on Tuvalu, beset by rising tides
12)  A look at New Zealand's non-paper
13)  ASEAN Ignores Climate
14)  Global Distribution for ECO

See the conferences en.climate or climate.news for full text

"In China we have a proverb -- More Haste Equals Less Speed"

Chinese Delegate at the INC talks, Quote of the day

1) 'Prevent Climate Holocaust' -- Greenpeace

By Eco Reporter

Greenpeace today called for a 'generation of defence policies'
to combat climate change and 'prevent a climate holocaust'.  A
Greenpeace spokesperson in Geneva said "To date progress at the
Intergovernmental Committee on climate change has been
indiscernible - yet it has less than twelve months to complete a
draft Framework Convention".

Greenpeace highlights three principles for a 'Global Defence
Agenda'. These are 'optimal defence of the planet and all its
inhabitants', policy based on 'best available science' and
application of the 'precautionary principle'.

The organization takes its starting point as the overwhelming
scientific consensus of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change' which reported last year to the Second World
Climate Conference that the human-made greenhouse effect was real
and promised increases in the earth's temperature 'unprecedented'
in human history.

Collective Action

Greenpeace calls for a Climate Convention to be agreed in 1992.
This should highlight risks and impacts of global warming, while
committing the international community to 'collective
precautionary actions which would prevent, as an absolute maximum,
a doubling of effective CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere'.

'In political terms' says Greenpeace, 'the Convention would amount
to a declaration of intent to halt global warming'.

Equity Formula

Also included in Greenpeace's demands are a CO2 Protocol to be
signed in 1992, under which nations would commit to reduce CO2
emissions on an 'equity formula' taking into account historical
emissions ('carbon guilt'), current per capita emissions, current
wealth (as GNP per capita), population and current energy
efficiency (GNP/total energy use) as a proportion of the global
average.

The group also calls for an Energy Efficiency Protocol, a
Renewable Energy Protocol and a Climate Fund.

For Energy Efficiency all countries would have to achieve at least
a 3% improvement a year up to 2000. Developing country signatories
would qualify for support from the Climate Fund, based on an
energy carbon tax. Greenpeace estimates that a US$30 billion fund
could be created by levying a tax of only $US9/TOE or
$US1.20/barrel, in the industrial countries. This, says
Greenpeace, would not cause disruption and is within the normal
band width of price fluctuation. Greenpeace points out that
$US30bn is less than three week's world arms expenditure.

The Renewable Energy Protocol would require nations to increase
generating capacity from renewable sources by at least 5% a year,
with a review in 2000.  The Climate Funds would support
development of wave, wind and other renewable energies. An
'International Agency for Technologies On Renewable Energies and
Efficiency' (TREES) would also be set up at a later stage, to
assist with implementation of the two energy protocols.

The organization also calls for 'new international mechanisms' to
give greenhouse research the highest scientific priority, and a
designated UN body charged with circulating such information and
convening conferences to review it.

Greenpeace puts priority on CO2 pollution, the main cause of
global warming and created mainly by energy use in industrialized
countries. Other gases with a Global Warming Potential (i.e.
causing global warming) - such as methane and nitrous oxide -
would be the subject of a further Protocol to be agreed as soon as
possible. Manufacture of new substances with a GWP (e.g. HFCs,
HCFCs) would be banned. Interim targets for enhancing national
sinks (such as forests) for CO2, would also be established.

2) New Publication from Climate Action Network

"Everything You Always Wanted To Know About Climate Change" is
a new booklet from the Climate Action Network.  To be published
next week, the booklet provides a basic introduction to key areas
of specialised knowledge concerned with global warming in a clear
and accessible manner.  It reviews the bewildering variety of
information on the subject in a clear and comprehensible way.

Jeremy Leggett reviews science, Stewart Boyle reviews energy,
Phillip Jessup transport, Patrice Miran, agriculture.  The final
chapter by Thijs de la Court outlines policy responses.

Funded with a grant from the Dutch Environment Ministry, the CAN
booklet is available from:

Climate Network Europe, 98 rue de Trne, Bte 8, 1050 Brussels,
Belgium.  Tel +32 2 512 93 60, fax +32 2 514 31 13.  Delegates at
the Geneva talks should contact Annie Roncerel of Climate Europe
to enquire about obtaining copies directly.

3) Conference Meets For Under 30 Minutes

By Eco Staff

The Geneva climate negotiators did not convene yesterday morning,
and then broke up after less than half an hour of their scheduled
three hour afternoon session. Delegates at the Intergovernmental
Negotiating Committee for a Framework Convention on Climate Change
disappeared into committee rooms in mid afternoon, in order to
continue arguments over who should chair the two key working
groups of the negotiations. Industrialised countries filled in
time with 'constructive' talks on technology transfer.

Japan possibly aside, the developed countries are now pursuing a
wait-and-see strategy as the Group of 77 (actually over 100
developing countries) and other sub-groups such as the Latin
American and Small Island States factions try to decide who they
think should be chairs and vice-chairs of Working Group I (Sources
and Sinks) and Working Group II (Legal Framework/Institutional
Issues). The most likely candidates for these jobs are Japan or
Mexico as chair of Working Group I, and Canada or Vanuatu for
Working Group II. The Asian countries want Japan to be chair (as
the developing countries may receive Japanese aid) but this might
over-represent developed countries as France already has the chair
of the whole conference, especially if Canada led the other
Working Group.

*       China and a number of other developing countries have
endorsed the position put forward by India, reported in
yesterday's Eco.

4) Report From Brazil

By Magda Lombardo

UNCED 92 - The Parallel NGO Conference At The 'Earth Summit'

The Forum of Brazilian NGOs for the Earth Summit (United Nations
Conference on Environment & Development - UNCED) in Rio 1992, has
begun preparation for its simultaneous conference parallel to the
official meeting. it will be located in the Rio de Janeiro,
Flamingo Neighbourhood.

There is a large area available for outdoor meetings, excellent
auditoria and convention centers, as well as restaurants and
hotels in the vicinity.

The choice of this location brings the NGO Conference to a
populated area thus allowing better participation of society at
large.

5) The Amazon - Proposal To Minister C. Garcia, Made 1700 June 7
1991

Removal of the Amazonian forest may have tremendous impacts on
species diversity and atmospheric chemistry. The Amazon basin is
host to roughly half the world's species, and the intensity and
complexity of plant-animal interactions, coupled with rapid
nutrient cycling in the soils, make the area vulnerable to
external disturbance. The Amazon is also an important natural sink
for CO2 and plays an important role in global tropospheric
chemistry.

A coupled numerical model of the global atmosphere and biosphere (1)
has been used to assess the effects of Amazon deforestation on the
regional and global climate. When the tropical forests in the
model were replaced with degraded grass (pasture), there was a
significant increase in the surface temperature (1 degrees C to 3
degrees C) and a decrease in evapotranspiration and precipitation
over Amazonia. In the simulation, the length of the dry season
also increased. Such an increase could make re-establishment of
the tropical forests after massive deforestation particularly
difficult.

(1) Shuka, J, Nobre, C, Sellus, P (1990) Amazon Deforestation on
Climate Change SCIENCE Vol 247, pp 1322P1325.

6) Science: Who Do You Believe?

by Dr Jeremy Leggett

Negotiators without a scientific background must surely be
forgiven for lapsing into confusion from time to time as they
watch the dance of scientific uncertainties over global warming.
The contents of the top scientific journals between the Chantilly
meeting and this one illustrates the ebb and flow of confusion
perfectly.

In early March, Professor Tom Wigley of the University of East
Anglia published his conclusion that sulphate aerosols from
fossil-fuel burning had actually dampened global warming (mostly
caused by  CO2 from fossil-fuel burning). Watch out for the coal
lobbyists telling you that coal-burning is good for the atmosphere
based on this! Wigley himself concluded that it would be entirely
wrong to consider sulphate-related cooling in isolation as a
benefit.

Atlantic

Later that month, researchers from a costly international
programme to access CO2 sinks in the oceans, the Joint Global
Ocean Flux Study, published their first results. They found wholly
unexpected variations in CO2 uptake and emission over relatively
small areas in the North Atlantic. The variation with latitude was
opposite to that previously reported for the region! This, they
concluded, suggests estimates of the oceanic sink for fossil fuel
inferred from existing data will be subject to significant error.
So much for negotiating the details of sinks under the US
Comprehensive Approach.  Scientists still do not know how much CO2
goes into the forests, and how much into the oceans to within at
least a thousand million tonnes a year.

In late March came reports that the 2,000 square km Wordie ice
shelf had broken off Antarctica, after a prolonged period of
elevated temperatures. As an ice shelf, essentially floating, it
will not boost sea level. And the crucial, much bigger, ice
shelves which pin the West Antarctic ice sheet onland are much
further south, and more than 10 degrees C colder.

Shocker

More worrying was the report, within a week, that maximum
temperatures in waters north of Frans Joseph Land in the Arctic
were warmer by 1 full degree C in 1990 than they had been 1987.
From the team that found that little shocker, came a typically
understated plea: it seems clear that there is need for careful
monitoring of the heat fluctuations in the Arctic, a region so
vulnerable to changes in global climate.

In April, researchers from the US Department of Agriculture and
the German Max Planck Institute published new findings about
methane and nitrous oxide sources in agriculture. Nitrogen
fertilisation was found to increase the production of nitrous
oxide, and decrease the uptake of methane, by soils.  More
confusions for the Comprehensive Approach. Perhaps J R Spradley
will be able to explain them? He seems to be streets ahead of the
world's climate scientists in terms of confidence that climate
change will be manageable.

Fertilizers

Nitrogen fertilizers, it turned out in late May, are not the only
way to amplify the greenhouse effect by putting more greenhouse
gases into the atmosphere. A group of British soil scientists
published calculations of what an IPCC-predicted temperature rise
would do to  CO2 releases from soils.  Answer: over the next 60
years, fully 19% of the CO2 that will be released if we are crazy
enough to allow fossil fuel use to continue at present rates.

In early May, writing in Nature, two of America's top
climatologists described a big one. Hot water in the tropics
during the 1987 El Nio generated water vapour which spawned a
major negative feedback in the atmosphere. It generated high
cirrus clouds which reflect high proportions of solar radiation
back into space. This seems to limit the extent of El Nino
warming. But before Don Perlman persuades you that all is
therefore safe, it would be well to recall that this has nothing
to do with boosting  CO2 in the atmosphere. Venus, too, reflects
huge proportions of incoming solar radiation back into space from
its clouds. The problem comes from the quantities of heat-trapping
CO2 which have built up in the atmosphere below them. And on Venus
these produce temperatures as high as 475 degrees C. Certainly not
good conditions for growing tomatoes in.

Assumption

In March, the University of Illinois provided more substantive
ammunition for the go-slow lobby: a revised projection of global
warming. But all this consisted of was an assumption - yes,
assumption - that the climate sensitivity would be only 0.5
degrees C.  Conclusion: the magnitude of the potential climate
change ranges from catastrophic to minor depending on the true
value for climate sensitivity.

What does the discerning policymaker of all this? A strong case
for the precautionary principle, that's what. We must not entrust
our children's future to scientists' theoretical negative
feedbacks - especially when so many investigations are pointing us
towards the many positive feedbacks lurking in the natural world.

The worst scientific development, of course, came in early April:
NASA's discovery that the ozone layer over mid-latitudes is
peeling away twice as fast as had been expected. "It is stunning
information, unexpected, disturbing it has implications we have
yet to explore." These were the words of the Director of the US
Environmental Protection Agency.

Climate scientists underestimated this. They underestimated the
speed of ozone depletion. They totally failed to predict the
Antarctic ozone hole.  Policymakers would do well to assume that
they may have underestimated global warming too.

The difference, of course, is that where global warming is
concerned, the existing estimates - as formalised in the IPCC
report - point to a present which can no longer be guaranteed to
deliver a future.

Dr Leggett is with Greenpeace International

7) Aedenate IU Presentan un Plan Energetico Alternativo

par  Asociacin Ecologista de Defensa de la Naturaleza

REnergi 2.000: Plan energtico alternativo para un crecimiento
sostenidoS es un documento elaborado por la Asociacin Ecologista
de Defensa de la Naturaleza (AEDENAT) y el Area de Planificacin
Econmica de Izquierda Unida (IU) que pretende servir de reflexin y
discusin para el conjunto de la sociedad. El documento tiene como
punto de partida fundamental las recomendaciones incluidas en el
informe de 1987 de la Comisin de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio
Ambiente y el Desarrouo, ms conocido como informe Brundtland. Se
inspira tambien en las conclusiones del Panel Intergubemamental
sobre el Cambio Climtico (IPCC) y sobre todo en el Plan Energtico
danes actualmente vigente del que toma el nombre. Los autores del
informe consideran que todos los paises industriales deben adoptar
planes energticos similares al propuesto si se quiere satisfacer
las necesidades energticas bsicas de gran parte de la poblacin
mundial y mantener un medio ambiente aceptable. No debe olvidarse
que ms de 2.000 millones de seres humanos (sobre un total de 5.400
millones) carecen de electricidad

Las dos grandes apuestas de este plan energtico son la adopcin
inmediata de medidas de ahorro y el desarrollo a ms largo plazo de
las energas renovables. Contra lo que es una creencia
generalizada, ahorrar no tiene nada que ver con penurla o
estancamiento econmico. La CEE redujo su intensidad energtica
(Energa final/UPlB) en un 25% desde el 73 y Dinamarca consume hoy
el 13% menos de energa que en esa fecha, sin que su desarrollo se
haya visto afectado.

Como consecuencia de los ahorros de energa previstos y de medidas
complementarias dirigidas a la oferta se consiguen importantes
objetivos ambientales: el abandono de la energa nuclear y reduccin
para el ao 2.000 de las emisiones de C02 (12%), S02 (80%) y NOx
(60%), disminuyendo por tanto nuestra contribucin al efecto
invernadero y las lluvias cidas.

El ahorro de energia previsto es de un 25,8% con respecto a la
tendencial.  Para ello se postula una politica de precios
energticos que no solo reflejen todos los costes de produccin sino
que adems evaluen sus efectos ambientales. Para este fin, se
propone la imposicin de una exaccin fiscal o Tasa de Aplicacin
Ecolgica (TAE) cuyos fondos no se destinan a los productores ni a
las arcas de Hacienda sino que van a potenciar la mejora de la
eficiencia energetica, el desarrollo de energas renovables y otros
fines complementarios.

Se fijan adems polticas sectoriales. En la industria se concretan
en la imposicin de normas de eficiencia y medioambientales ms
estrictas, garantizando adems su cumplimiento, y programas de
financiacin para facilitar la introduccin de tecnologas. Las
financiaciones no son a fondo perdido sino por el sistema de
financiacin por terceros. En el sector edificios se propone el
etiquetado energtico, la construccion acorde con las normas de
edificacin, la prohibicin de uso de calderas elctricas para
calefaccin central y la actuacin ejemplarizante de la
Administracin en sus edificios. En el transporte se impulsan los
modos de transporte ms eficientes, se imponen normas para
restringir el uso del vehculo privado y se promocionan los
automviles mas eficientes. Para estos fines se preven inversiones
totales de 932.000 millones de pesetas hasta el ao 2.000 con
apoyos publicos de 90.000 millones.

Para abastecer esta demanda se impulsa decididamente la penetracin
de gas natural, se apoya la cogeneracin y se rehabilitan y se
aumenta la potencia de algunas centrales convencionales. Se preven
para estos fines unas inverslones de 900.000 millones de ptas.

Puesto que ahorrar energa es ms barato que producirla, se
consiguen paralelamente notables ahorros. Estos se cifran en algo
ms de un billn en combustibles, 1,3 billones por no instalar nueva
potencia y unos 170.000 millones en la gestin de los residuos
radiactivos.

Este plan lieva implicita una apuesta tecnolgica de desarrollo de
las energas renovables, sistemas descontaminantes y de ahorro e
energa

8) California's New Climate Change Policy

 by Dr Jean A. Merriman

The sheer size of California and its emissions of greenhouse
gases give it global importance. Consider, for instance, the
impact of its more than 25 million registered vehicles, more cars
than there are people in all of Canada!

The political importance of the state, with a burgeoning
population of 30 millions (expected to add another 11 by 2010)
means its climate change policy will reverberate through national
and internal economies. This may create significant markets for
technologies and services to reduce greenhouse gases.  Yet the
March 1991 draft of California's policy on the impacts of global
warming on California (1) was outdated even as it was printed
because of fast moving international and national developments.

California's policy, now undergoing public hearings, is quite
uneven. Its very comprehensive analysis of CO2 sources based upon
a recently published 1988 survey (2) is worthy of emulation and it
is strong in energy analysis as well.  In recommending, almost
sotto voce, that future policy development be done by an
interdisciplinary group rather than under the aegis of the
California Energy Commission, the document points indirectly to
the cause of its weakness in other areas, most notably, in
relation to international policy and forestry. The international
section does little more than list the meetings that have brought
us to the INC process.

Whereas there is a growing consensus that boreal, temperate and
tropical forests will all figure as both sources and sinks of
greenhouse gases, the California document dismisses the issue as a
problem of tropical areas.  The sole attention to forests is a
paragraph in support of urban afforestation which indeed does give
a big energy benefit per tree in countering the urban heat island
effect.  Remarkably, however, populous California has only one
government urban forestry specialist assigned to this important
function.

The IPCC has drawn attention to the likely vulnerability of
semi-arid forests to climate change, and California may serve as a
limited case study for central Chile, southern Australia and the
extreme southern part of Africa, which also have  Mediterranean
climates. In California, the combined stress of air pollution,
insect infestation and nearly seven years of drought are leading
to a crisis level fire hazard, with an estimated 7 billion
board-feet of standing dead timber in the south of the state and
in the mountains of the Sierra Nevada. This is equal to nearly two
year's commercial harvest.

The Energy Commission's draft considered carbon emission alone, to
the exclusion of forest sources of nitrous oxide and methane.
However, Joel Levine, a NASA scientist, has published data about
biogenic soil emissions of nitrous oxide from experimentally
burned forests in the state (3). This  is just one example of a
growing body of knowledge about gases other than carbon dioxide.
We need policies on these areas.

Up to now, fires were considered an inevitable part of recycling
carbon. But in the face of increasing emissions of other
greenhouse gases from burning forests, we may ask what solutions
may avert damaging wildfires. Three possibilities suggest
themselves.  With the application of eco technology, some of which
is in place and some which seems feasible, the dead trees could be
chipped and

(i)     converted to mulch to enhance replanting of trees,
possibly in conjunction with inoculation of necessary soil
microflora

(ii) aerobically composted to be sold as an organic fertilizer

(iii) fermented to make ethanol fuel for vehicles.

Biodiversity and sustainability concerns suggest that replanting
should be in the context of forest restoration rather than a
conventional fiber-factory perspective. Also, advantage can be
taken of the experience gained from over a thousand composting
facilities in various stages of planning and implementation. These
divert organic matter from rapidly filling municipal waste sites.
Lasting production of ethanol would support the goals of the 1990
Clean Air Act by providing cleaner fuel as required by law for
vehicles in the Los Angeles air basin.

Accomplishing this would require a sustained policy for the
development of stable economic structures, cultivation of a new
professional workforce, related infrastructure and a constant
search for the least greenhouse gas pathway through this dilemma.

Dr Jean A Merriman represents the American Forestry Association at
the INC talks. She is a consultant to Global Relief.

(1) "Global Climate Change: Potential Impacts and Policy
Recommendation," California Energy Commission Draft Report,
P5000910007, March 199l.  See pages 1-6 to 1-8 on forestry.

(2) "1988 Inventory of California Greenhouse Gas Emissions,"
California Energy Commission Final Staff Report, October 1990.

Both of the above are available upon request from California
Energy Commission.

(3) Joel S. Levine, "The Effects of Fire on Biogenic Soil Emission
of Nitric Oxide and Nitrous Oxide," Global Biogeochemical Cycles,
vol. 2, no. 4, pages 445-449, 1988.

9) Climate issues in Malaysia

by Gurmit Singh K.S., President, EPSM

Malaysians should be as concerned as any other citizens of this
planet about the deterioration of the global climate.

It is pertinent to stress that global warming arising from the
emission of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide, methane and CFCs
will result in altered rainfall patterns, sea level rise, drier
soil conditions, and reductions in crop and marine resource
yields. Drought-induced malnutrition and famine as well as fatal
tropical diseases are likely to spread.

But there seems be great unwillingness on behalf of the worst
culprits -- the developed countries, the USA and the elites of the
developing world to face the facts. That is why they keep on
insisting on more studies, placing the blame on the poor and the
weak, and doing everything to delay the adoption of an effective
Climate Convention to curb the problem at a global or even
national level. Their luxury emissions from motor vehicles far
outweigh the "survival emissions" from draft animals & paddy
fields. Yet the developing countries and the poor are being told
by the powerful countries to cut back while they themselves hardly
move to reduce private car emissions.

Indisputable

It is unfair to blame the developing countries as the main threat
to the global environment when the ecological stress on the global
commons has been largely caused by the North. As the UNEP states
"Global problems, in fact, have created an indisputable argument
for greater equity". Malaysia was a party to the Ministerial
Declaration of the 2nd World Climate Conference in November '90
which, in part, declared "the rate of climate change predicted to
occur over the next century is unprecedented. We commit ourselves
and intend to take active and constructive steps in a global
response. We call for negotiations on a framework convention on
climate change to begin without delay. We reaffirm our wish that
this convention contain real commitments by the international
community."

Little Action

Yet all this rhetoric has produced little national or
international action. In Malaysia, there do not seem to be
concrete measures to reduce carbon emissions, whether from motor
vehicles or deforestation. The Climate Convention negotiations
have hardly moved and this second session promises little hope in
view of the intransigence of countries like the USA. The switch to
renewable energies has yet to occur.

Mushrooming car population

The UNEP suggests a list of actions for individuals, communities,
nations and the international community. Certainly there is
greater hope for curbing climate deterioration if positive action
can be taken on the majority of these. The challenge is how to
make this happen - because very few seem to be willing to make the
necessary adjustments. While it is legitimate for Malaysia and
other developing countries to accuse the developed countries of a
form of environmental imperialism, we should also be honest enough
to act on our own shortcomings: like the absence of energy
efficiency programmes and a mushrooming car population.

EPSM calls for a definite commitment from all sectors of the
Malaysian and world community to take immediate action to curb
further deterioration of our common climate. We hope that there
will be honesty and transparency and a willingness to sustain and
save our environmental common - the climate.

The following aspects of the issue should be noted:

*       Local micro impacts of sea level rise --

No systematic study of this issue has been carried out in Malaysia
although some Malaysian towns have been named as likely to be
effected. It will obviously affect a proposed ambitious 3 km
foreshore reclamation of the entire west coast of Peninsular
Malaysia. Coastal erosion already underway may be worsened and
some aquaculture projects may have to be abandoned. Already a
number of fishing communities have had to be translocated.

*       Emission targets for developing countries --

Equity necessitates that all so-called 'luxury' emissions must be
limited and cut-back. The biggest cuts must be made by the largest
emitters, whether on a total or per capita basis. In the absence
of better alternatives, we are willing to go along with para 4 of
the draft CAN statement.

*       Facilitating technology exchange --

There is no question that technology transfer has to occur, not
necessarily between developed and developing countries alone. But
the technology transfer, which should also be of clean or
environmentally sound technologies, should be more of a
cooperative process with all parties being actively involved.
Since technology transfer is not confined to mere 'hardware'
transfers and in this case must be to reduce greenhouse gases,
peoples' organizations must have a voice in determining needs and
allocation of resources. One way of ensuring their participation
is to ensure that all such transfers should be undertaken in the
open and to insist on there being evidence of such participation,
before formal transfers are permitted.

Significant amounts of financial resources must be set aside,
perhaps offset from the Third World Debt. Another way would be to
recover it from the amount of carbon sinks that the recipients are
able to provide.

*       Forests as sinks --

It is inequitable to ask the LDCs to make greater commitments to
preserving their forests than those that developed countries such
as USA and Japan are willing to make for their own forests. The
role of forests in the CO2 debate must not be exaggerated. All
forests (not just tropical ones) must also be evaluated and
sustained for biodiversity as well as sustenance of indigenous
people. The recent ill-advised singling out of tropical
deforestation as a major greenhouse cause has created a backlash
which might result in the undermining of the biodiversity stakes.

10) Lessons from Montreal Protocol

This article was published as an Editorial yesterday in 'The
Guardian' London.

by T.J. Glauthier, WWF-US

The pace and eventual success of the "Montreal Protocol on
Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer" affords a strong case for
including an initial set of targets and timetables in the
convention on climate change that is currently under negotiation.

Parties to the climate change meetings are split on the question
of how rapidly to move to substance in the negotiations.  Some
argue that we ought only to produce a framework convention by June
1992, with substantive commitments to be the subject of on-going
negotiations after that.  The code words for that position are "no
targets or timetables" by 1992.

At the other extreme are some delegates who want very specific and
extensive substantive commitments in the 1992 convention.

The substantive commitments embodied today in the Montreal
Protocol are the product of three successive rounds of
agreements.

The first of these was the Vienna Convention, which was a general
framework convention without any substantive commitments at all,
adopted in 1985. It had no targets or timetables, focusing instead
on cooperation in research and monitoring, and providing a general
framework for a future protocol regarding specific substantive
commitments.

The next round was the Montreal Protocol itself, signed in 1987.
That contained substantive commitments on the five CFCs and three
halons considered to be the key ozone-depleting substances. It
also added some enforcement provisions, but reserved most other
substantive issues for subsequent negotiations.

The third agreement, known as the "London Revisions," was signed
in June 1990.  It significantly strengthened and expanded the
substantive commitments, including: accelerating the timetable for
the CFC phase-out, expanding the annex of controlled CFCs to 10,
moving from a freeze to a phase-out of halons, adding carbon
tetrachloride and methyl chloroform to the list of substances to
be phased out, adding a list of 34 HCFCs as an annex of
transitional substances, and creating the Multilateral Fund to
assist developing countries through financial and technical
cooperation in also phasing out these substances.

The situation facing negotiators on climate change is in many
respects similar to that in Montreal in 1987. A useful model
already exists for the legal and institutional framework. And the
science is advanced enough that we at least know what first steps
will be required to make a meaningful start in limiting emissions
of greenhouse gases.

Accordingly, the current negotiations should aim for a June 1992
agreement that parallels generally what was accomplished in the
two rounds of Vienna and Montreal together. In particular, the
June 1992 convention should contain both a general framework and
an initial set of substantive commitments that will constitute a
starting point for control of greenhouse gases.

In addition, the 1992 Climate Convention should establish a
process for future negotiations to expand the initial set of
commitments, as the London agreement did for ozone-depleting
chemicals. Admittedly, the science at present is insufficient to
specify the levels of control that ultimately should be agreed
upon, and the full range of substances and activities that must be
controlled.  Implementation of a full, comprehensive approach
should be the subject of on-going negotiations after June 1992,
but should not delay substantive commitments that can be
confidently undertaken now.

11) Lman's Chateau on Tuvalu, beset by rising tides.

The UK, Japan, Norway and Australia are promoting a 'new idea':
Pledge and Review. As might be guessed from its name, 'Pledge and
Review' works like Public Relations, by disguising unpleasant
facts.

The premise of PR is simple: nations should pledge individual
schemes to reduce greenhouse gases, and then meet periodically to
review their progress.  This wonderful recipe is praised for
flexibility (countries can tailor their own targets and
timetables) but its real selling point is that the 'targets'
aren't targets at all: merely pledges. By substituting pledges for
binding commitments, Pledge and Review threatens to dilute both
the legal and political strength of a Climate Convention.

Failure to require minimum targets lowers the price of admission
still further (you pay only what you feel you can afford). Most
countries thus could sign in 1992: even those intending to do
precious little about climate. For example, the 15% increase in
CO2 planned by the US could easily pass muster as a net reduction
when coupled with CFCs cuts.

Now is not the time for such semantic tricks and policies composed
solely of smoke and mirrors which might as well have been
conceived in an advertising agency.  The world needs action, not
just PR for governments whose will has failed them.

Feelings at  the global warming talks appear to be getting rather
heated.  Lman yesterday overheard a member of the British
delegation berating a member of Greenpeace for opposing the
introduction of HFCs and HCFCs as replacements for CFCs. "Everyone
says that they will contribute very little to global warming. You
oppose CFCs but you have to support something.  Otherwise you will
lose credibility." Lman was left wondering which was more
important:  credibility today or the atmosphere tomorrow.

As for the "everyone",  that turned out to be the scientists at
the UKs Department of the Environment.  Lman wonders if they
shouldn't  read the IPCC report. Lman is told that HFCs and
HFCFCs contribute over 10% to global warming over their lifetimes
and this while CO2 emissions are due to be limited. 10% of a vast
amount is a very, very large amount.  Especially Lman ponders, if
you are from Tuvalu.

12) A Look at New Zealand's non-paper

New Zealand's fulsome sheep population does not mean that the
kiwis follow the flock on every occasion.  Recognising
responsibility for dealing with global warming, New Zealand has a
firm policy  commitment to reduce CO2 emissions by 20% by the year
2000. This is the most progressive of any OECD country, and has
been welcomed as such by international observers.

It was curious, therefore, that NZ delegation leader Chris Beeby
omitted to mention this commitment in NZ's maiden speech at the
opening plenary session yesterday. ECO trusts this was an
oversight, and not a result of political "shearing" by big and
powerful OECD friends.

ECO will be interested to monitor how other nations which have
made firm national commitments on CO2 honour their national
positions in the INC negotiations. NGOs and the climate,  are
relying on the more "progressive" nations to hold firm on the CO2
issue, and encourage other nations to join them in taking this
important first step. Delegations need to bear in mind that
stabilising of CO2 concentrations will require even deeper
emissions cuts. Every year of delay in making real reductions
carries a potentially huge penalty for all nations.

13) ASEAN Ignores Climate

ASEAN states finished meeting on the environment yesterday,
without getting round to discussing climate change. This left
Malaysians fuming as they had drafted a lengthy ASEAN policy on
the subject, in anticipation of a climate convention and the Earth
Summit. States such as Thailand and Brunei show little interest,
while the highly developed country of Singapore maintains a low
profile. "It's a great shame we aren't hearing from ASEAN at the
climate talks" said one delegate in Geneva.

14) Global Distribution for Eco

by Eco Staff

As well as being distributed to press, delegates and NGOs by hand
every morning, to press, delegates and observers, fast electronic
distribution by fax and e-mail makes it possible to distribute Eco
is to a large unseen audience around the world.

Fax copies are sent daily to six distribution 'nodes' in
Australia, Brazil, Belgium, Kenya, the UK and the USA, from where
they are faxed on in turn to other countries, organizations,
newspapers, national government representatives and
decision-makers. It is also faxed directly to 25 national WWF
organisations.

The text (without pictures or layout) is sent via e-mail to Lelani
Arris, of EcoNet's Energy and Climate Information Exchange, in
Canada. She distributes it directly to environmental
organizations, climate researchers, academics, journalists, and
other interested parties, many of whom pass it on themselves.  For
example, Eco from this conference is being sent daily to 200 local
Australian radio stations. Lelani also 'uploads' it to
climate-related electronic noticeboards and conferences on the
global networks of the Association of Progressive Communications
(APC), making it available to their 10,000 subscribers worldwide.

Eco's production and distribution has been organized as a project
of Media Natura for the Climate Action Network, and is funded by
EDF. Hardware and software support has come from Apple Computer,
Industriade AG, Avec Informatique, Aldus UK, Computers Unlimited
(Caere), Microsoft and Sitka

Ways to receive Eco

*       By fax or mail or by hand:

The best way for members of the press to obtain Eco is probably to
get it faxed directly to you via your local office by making
contact with one of the NGOs present at the conference and making
a personal arrangement. By calling the NGO room (+41 22 740
0536/734 5243) it is normally possible for the staff to fax ECO
directly to any press outlet worldwide.

*       By APC: these are the local member organizations - you can
normally 'log on' to them over ordinary telephone lines, using any
personal computer, for little more than the cost of a local call:

Alternex, IBASE, Rue Vincente de Souza, 29, 2251 Rio de Janeiro,
22251 Brazil Phone +55 (21) 286 0348 Fax  +55 (21) 286 0541 email
ax:support

FredsNatet (PeaceNet Sweden), Timmermansgrand 4, 5-116 27
Stockholm, Sweden Phone +46 (8) 720 0001. Fax  +46 (8) 720 0035
email pns:support

GreenNet, 25 Downham Road, London Nl 5AA, England Phone +44 (71)
923 2624 Fax +44 (71) 2541102 email gn:support

IGC Networks: PeaceNet, EcoNet, HomeoNet, ConflictNet, 3228
Sacramento Street, San Francisco, CA 94115, USA Phone +1 (415) 923
0900 Fax  +1 (415) 9231665 email igc:support

Nicarao, CRIES, Apdo. C-163, de la Iglesia el Carmen, 1 Quadra al
Lago, Managua, Nicaragua Phone +505 (2) 26228 email ni:support

Pegasus Networks/EarthNet, PO Box 424, The Epicentre, Border
Street, Byron Bay 2481, New South Wales, Australia Phone +6166 856
789 Fax  +6166 856 962 email peg:support

Web, 456 Spadina Avenue, 2nd Floor, Toronto, Ontario M5T 2GE,
Canada Phone +1 (416) 929 0634 Fax:  +1(416) 925 7536 email
web:spider

E-mail is the best way for interested researchers and members of
the public to obtain the information in Eco.

*       More copies are normally available from the NGO room.

*       Due to shortage of resources, Eco is not normally
available after a meeting or conference is ended. However, for
individual copies or to find out if volumes have been republished
in book form, an office of the Climate Action Network should be
contacted - addresses will be published in a later Eco.

CREDITS:

Every day many of you help to get Eco out. Issue 3 would like to
thank the following:

Navros Dubash, Annie Roncerel, Debbie Good, T.J. Glauthier ,Magda
Lombardo, Kirsty Hamilton, Paul Hohnen, Jerry Leggett, Richard
Mott, Scott Hajost

ECO is edited by Chris Rose; production editors Malcolm
Sutherland and Alister Sieghart

ECO wishes to acknowledge the generous support of the following:
Apple Computer - Industrade AG, Wallisellen
AVEC INFORMATIQUE SA, Route des Acacias, 47 Geneva
Intercontinental Hotel, Wagons Lits

ECO (name as in 'SWCC') has been produced for EDF and others as a
Media Natura project with the generous support of the Apple
Computer Division, Industrade AG, Wallisellen and Avec
Informatique SA, Geneva.

Software support has been donated by Aldus, Applelink, Computers
Unlimited, Microsoft, Sitka. (any others).

Design by Akel Minott, London; Production Editors Alister
Sieghart, Shades & Characters and Malcolm Sutherland, Recruit
Media.

Electronic mail distribution coordinator Lelani Arris, EcoNet
Energy and Climate Information Exchange (US), supported by a
grant from the Joyce Mertz-Gilmore Foundation.

Project Management Chris Bligh , Media Natura, 21 Tower Street,
London WC2H 9NS Tel (+44) 71 240 2936 Fax (+44) 71 240 2291.

FOR MORE INFORMATION:

For enquiries and response to ECO:
ECO Editorial Staff
Tivoli Room, Intercontinental Hotel, Geneva
Telephone: (+41) 22 740 0541 / 734 6574
FAX:       (+41) 22 734 8425
E-mail:    gn:wwfgland, gn:swcc

For Press enquiries to particular NGO spokespersons:
The Non-Governmental Organisations (NGO) Room
Persan Room, Intercontinental Hotel, Geneva
Telephone: (+41) 22 740 0536 / 734 5243
FAX:       (+41) 22 734 6442

For information about fax distribution of ECO (FAX numbers):
Australian Cons. Foundation:     Bill Hare         61-3-416-241
Belgium: CAN - Europe            Tasmin Rose      32-2-512-6673
S. America : SOS Mata Atlantica                  55-11-885-1680
USA: Center for Global Change    Pam Wexler      1-301-403-4292
UK: Media Natura                 Sally Cavanagh  44-71-240-2291

Every issue of ECO will be posted in full to the en.climate and
climate.news conferences on EcoNet (APC) and the sci.environment
conference on Usenet.

For information about electronic mail and conference distribution
of ECO, contact:
E-mail coordinator: Lelani Arris
APC Networks - igc:larris


Telephone -    1-403-852-4057 (Canada)
FAX -          1-403-852-3215 (Canada)

Or contact support staff at one of the following APC Networks:

Network                Telephone                    E-mail
---------------------------------------------------------------
GreenNet (Europe)      (44) 71 923 2624             gn:support
EcoNet (US)            (1) 415 442 0220             igc:support
Pegasus (Australia)    (61) 66 856 789              peg:support
Alternex (Brazil)      (55) 21 286 0348             ax:support
Nicarao (Nicaragua)    (505) 2 26  228              ni:ayuda
WEB (Canada)           (1) 416 596 0212             web:spider
Peacenet (Scandinavia) (46)  8 72 00001             pns:support

For information about Media Natura:
Media Natura Project Manager : Chris Bligh
Telephone (+44) 71 240 2936/ 71 497 2673/ 71 497 2712
FAX: (+44) 71 240 2291
E-mail : gn:medianatura

To find out more about Media Natura please write to Media
Natura, 21 Tower Street, London WC2H 9NS, United Kingdom

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

We are interested in tracking ECO electronic distribution.  We
hope to keep improving our service as we approach UNCED 1992.  If
you find this newsletter of value, please return the following
report.  Thank you for your help!!

******************************************************************
ECO NEWSLETTER - GENEVA - ISSUE #1

How did you get the newsletter?

_________e-mail _________________________________address
_________conference or list _____________________name

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                      * EcoNet Energy & Climate


Telephone: 403-852-4057                * Jasper, Alberta T0E 1E0
Fax:       403-852-3215                * Canada
******************************************************************



Tue, 07 Dec 1993 12:46:00 GMT
 
 [ 1 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. ECO GENEVA (INC) #6 June 25, 1991 (

2. ECO GENEVA (INC) #5 June 24, 1991 (

3. ECO GENEVA (INC) #4 June 23, 1991 (

4. ECO GENEVA (INC) #7 June 26, 1991 (

5. ECO GENEVA (INC) #4A June 23, 1991

6. ECO GENEVA (INC) #2A June 19, 1991

7. ECO GENEVA (INC) #1 June 18, 1991

8. ECO GENEVA (INC) #8 June 27, 1991 (

9. ECO GENEVA (INC) #2 June 19, 1991

10. ECO GENEVA #10 - Dec 20, 1991 (55K)

11. ECO GENEVA #8 - Dec 18, 1991 (29K)

12. ECO NAIROBI #10 - Sept 20, 1991 (32


 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software