Here’s an analysis of the issues at the root of 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference or COP21, and whether there will be a consensus document which takes the developed and developing world along
Will the Paris climate conference usher in a new global charter for action on climate changeIJ The fact is that for the past 25 odd years — the framework convention on climate change was signed in Rio in 1992 — countries have found every reason to prevaricate and obfuscate. So, why would anything change nowIJ
As I write this, it is two days to the endgame at the Paris climate conference. There has been little breakthrough on the contentious issues that elude an agreement, but still everybody is clear that there will be an agreement.
I am beginning to understand why they are so confident. let me explain. For the first time since the beginning of climate negotiations, the erstwhile climate renegades are in control of the dialogue, narrative and the audience. The Umbrella Group is a grouping led by the US and includes the biggest rich polluters, such as Australia and Japan, who have always been in the dock for not taking action to combat climate change. In Paris, these countries have done an image change.
They are now the good guys. They want the world to be ambitious in meeting not just the 2°C temperature threshold, they are pushing for even staying below 1.5°C. They say they are pushing because they care for the small island nations, which will suffer horrendous consequences with rising temperatures. They also want an effective arrangement to monitor progress and to ramp up actions to meet these targets.
How can this be wrong, responds a spellbound audience. This makeover is not overnight, or sudden. These countries have also done their homework, so that the script is crafted skillfully and the propaganda is spread. Audaciously.
Economics, not ecology
When countries meet to negotiate a climate change deal, they discuss economics and not ecology. This is unfortunate. No country in the world has found a way to de-link its economic growth with the growth of greenhouse emissions — mainly carbon dioxide.
The inconvenient truth is that countries, particularly the rich nations, have done little to cut emissions at the scale and pace needed. The world has been brought to this state because of decades of unrepentant emission.
An inconvenient truth is that climate change requires the world to share global atmospheric space. This is because carbon dioxide — the key pollutant — has a long life and once emitted, stays in the atmosphere for over 100 years. The emissions of the already rich countries have filled up the atmosphere and today, the emerging and poor countries are asking for their right to development. But there is no space left for them to grow.
However, the rich countries did not reduce; the US, Australia, Canada walked out of this agreement. At the same time, countries like China increased their emissions. Suddenly, we find that the world has run out of space and time. We are dealing with extreme weather events, crop losses, floods and disasters.
These countries forget that it is the very countries that ask for leftover crumbs that are the victims experiencing worst weather-related calamities. They have not contributed to the emissions that are causing the increase in temperature. But they are certainly worst impacted today. The stock of gases already in the atmosphere comes from the same countries that are on the high pedestal today.
The fact is the Umbrella Group has spurned all efforts to control their own runaway emissions. They have not contributed money. They have not contributed technology. They have not done anything to pay for a transition to clean energy in the developing world. Ironically, they want the transition to happen only in the developing world.
But it is also a hard fact, not an irony, that once the carbon budget is consumed as they have done there is little anybody can do about it other than cry injustice. It is also a fact that these countries continue to have unambitious plans to curtail their emissions. But since their takeover of the climate talks is complete, there is nobody to ask these inconvenient questions.
There is no other way to explain the absolute lack of dialogue that exists now. In Paris, in this COP21, it seems nobody else is in attendance. There is only one narrative and no conversation. The Europeans, who are hosting the conference, are lost. The French, always adroit in managing conflicts, seem vacuous and irrelevant. But it is clear that if we want to live in an interdependent world, voices of dissent cannot become illegitimate or be put on mute.
Extreme weather, climate change
We are seeing an increased severity and frequency of extreme weather events. Farmers in India are facing the double blow of agrarian distress and extreme weather events as a result of climate change. The impact of extreme weather events on India’s agriculture is growing. In early 2015, as many as 15 Indian States were affected and 33 per cent of the cropped areas was damaged. The loss to farmers was in excess of `20,000 crore. This is the experience of farmers not only in India but the rest of the world as well.
Recently, we released a report on the status of farming in India as a result of extreme weather events. Titled lived Anomaly, the report is about what is happening to farmers in India because of extreme weather events, largely as told by farmers themselves. The report is an assessment of the impact of the unseasonal rainfall and hailstorms in February-April 2015 on agriculture in India.
For a country like India, where more than 60 per cent of people depend on agriculture, climate change is already increasing the distress of farmers who are suffering due to poor policies increasing input costs.
India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi, for the first time, articulated the principle of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR) in terms of carbon space in his speech at the Paris climate conference. A climate deal based on equity has been a long-standing demand of India, and CSE has consistently supported and advocated this demand. PM Modi’s demand for a fair share of carbon space for developing countries has suggested the way to operationalise equity. However, his stand has not gone down well with the West, and the Western media which has been labelling India as obstructionist.
little progress in Paris
The CoP is expected to produce a consensus document a document which all countries of the world can call their own. But the current status of talk shows that none of this is happening. The developed world and developing world hold different points of view on the fundamentals — who is responsible for climate change and global warming and who will shoulder the burden of the responsibility of climate change. The developed world is trying its best to wash its hands of its responsibility, and charges are flying thick and fast.
It was agreed that at the Paris conference, every country will submit its Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC) — its climate action plan. Put together these plans must add up so that the world remains below the 2°C rise in temperature. The problem is that these plans are not adding up to much. The current emission reduction commitments of all countries, including India, add up to 800 billion tonnes.
There is a gigatonne gap that needs to be filled. The INDCs of developed countries, particularly the United States, are unambitious, which means that unless these are seriously amended and implemented in letter and spirit, the world will not stop at 2 degrees temperature rise. It is absolutely imperative that the INDCs are discussed and amended in order to restrict global warming.
American consumption and needs of developing world
The fact is that the US is the world’s largest historical contributor to greenhouse gas emissions the stock that is already in the atmosphere and already warming the earth’s surface and the second largest contributor (after China) to annual emissions. What the US does makes a huge difference to the world’s fight against runaway climate change.
The US climate action plan is neither ambitious nor equitable. Worse, it is but business as usual. Our findings are most inconvenient, we know. Our friends in US civil society are sure to accuse us of playing into the hands of the Republican Party, that fearsome free-market gang of climate sceptics.
US lifestyle and consumption patterns are aspirational and addictive. Quite simply, everybody wants to be an American. Every citizen of the developing world wants to either live in America or live like an American. If it were possible to attain such a lifestyle and yet combat climate change, our concern would be unfounded. But that is not possible. If Americans continue to guzzle, it is not possible to expect that the rest will not follow in their footsteps.
The question is particularly difficult because the world has already consumed some 1,900 billion tonnes between 1850 and now. A single country like the US, with barely 5 per cent of the world’s population, has appropriated 21 per cent of the carbon budget.
The world is currently following the unsustainable American consumption model which is leading to excessive demand for consumer goods and energy. Earlier this year, we released a report titled Capitan America: US climate goals A Reckoning, which revealed that the US was nowhere near reducing emission.
The report said that the US was shifting from coal to gas-based electricity production because it had found gas and that it was cheaper to produce electricity from gas in the current context for the US. It was price that was determining the shift in policy, not its environmental thinking. In 2030, only 15 per cent of US energy will come from renewable energy. This is very small.
Paris agreement must accept that all countries have the right to development and that this requires equitable sharing of the global carbon budget. Of the 2,900 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide, some 1,900 billion tonnes have been used up this amount of carbon dioxide is already accumulated in the atmosphere. There are some 1,000 billion tonnes left, which can be emitted between now and 2100.
But the US wants to erase the historical responsibility of countries and push the burden of transition to the developing world. This should not be acceptable to India and other developing countries. We need carbon space to grow and ensure that our people’s needs are met.
The world must strongly underscore the need to keep the temperature rise below 2°C at the very least. This has been coming up in Paris and there is discussion on keeping the temperature rise below 1.5 degrees. With less than one degree rise, the world is beginning to experience deadly impacts. Even a 2 degree rise will be too much and we expect the severity and frequency of extreme weather events to increase even more.
Things to remember
I would like iterate a few points one, that the already industrialised countries have overused their carbon quota. Two, by 2030, according to the current emission targets on the table, some 80 per cent of the carbon budget will be used up. This would be fine if all countries were at equal levels of development and would not require any space for growth beyond 2030.
But India and Africa would still struggle to meet the basic needs of people beyond 2030. But by then the carbon budget would be all gone. What happens to their right to developmentIJ
Thirdly, Paris must agree to operationalise equity by accepting that the level of effort of each country’s INDC will be equal to its share of the global carbon budget. Anything less would be development apartheid.
Fourthly, the Paris agreement must recognise that it is the world’s poor who are worst hit and most vulnerable but are the least responsible for the emissions.
Finally, Paris must build the framework for future action. This framework has to be real and meaningful if climate change has to be combated. To do this it must identify key actions that can be supported through global funding — not ways in which aid is passed off as climate support to make the transition towards low-carbon growth.
The world has a chance in Paris, a big chance. The crowd of world leaders which descended on the scene in Paris is indicative of the importance of both the Paris COP as well as the issue of climate change. What I am looking from Paris is equity and justice, rare in the modern world, but nothing less will do.