Just a day after Indian Premier Manmohan Singh said the country could commit to emissions cuts with strings attached, the chief Indian climate negotiator has cast doubt on that possibility, confirming only that India would be open to "Deviation from Business as Usual".
"There cannot be any emission cuts," said Saran, adding that the developed world did not expect countries like India to adopt emission reduction targets but instead to accept "deviation from business as usual."
India is currently the fourth-leading country in terms of co2 emissions, at 1.5 billion tons of co2 equivalent emissions per year as of 2006, putting it just behind Russia. China and the U.S. were at 6.1 and 5.5 billion tons respectively.
In terms of per capita emissions, however, India's 1.29 tons per person puts it at the bottom of the list. China's per capita emissions in '06 were at 4.57 tons per person, just over the worldwide average and the U.S.'s per capita emissions were at 18.68 tons per person, the highest in the world, with the exceptions of Kuwait, Qater and the U.A.R.
Sunday, November 29, 2009
China pledges emission cuts per unit of GDP
The Chinese announcement Thursday Nov. 26 of firm targets in emission cuts is tied to the country's GDP.
The tactic is unique among the major greenhouse gas emitters, however it does represent some quantifiable target, which is something that no one has been sure the Chinese would agree to.
The specific target set is to reduce co2 emissions by 40-45% of 2005 levels by 2020, relative to each point of GDP.
According to the People's Daily, United Nations Development Program (UNDP) Administrator Helen Clark said "That is a very important and ambitious target... The announcement injects a momentum in leading up to the Copenhagen summit".
The tactic is unique among the major greenhouse gas emitters, however it does represent some quantifiable target, which is something that no one has been sure the Chinese would agree to.
The specific target set is to reduce co2 emissions by 40-45% of 2005 levels by 2020, relative to each point of GDP.
According to the People's Daily, United Nations Development Program (UNDP) Administrator Helen Clark said "That is a very important and ambitious target... The announcement injects a momentum in leading up to the Copenhagen summit".
Friday, November 27, 2009
Entire Country At Risk: Bhutan in danger of global warming disaster
The tiny Himalayan country of Bhutan is one of the world's last unspoiled treasures. People live a traditional lifestyle in unbelievably picturesque settings.
Bhutan's breathtaking "Tiger's Nest"
As a report by Anjali Nayaer in the current edition of Nature News explains in detail, Bhutan is a nation on the brink of disaster, it's geographic landscape in the midst of literally earth-shaking transformation:
Glaciers in the Himalayas are retreating faster than in any other part of the world and they could disappear completely by 2035. This puts the mountainous nation of Bhutan at a special risk. In an area smaller than Switzerland, it has 983 glaciers and 2,794 glacial lakes, some of which have burst to produce deadly glacial lake floods.
A almost unbelievable transformation is underway across the planet, and nowhere is it more all-encompassing than in Bhutan, as the article goes on to explain:
The sounds of global warming are deafening at Thorthormi glacier. Every few minutes, a block of ice rips off the glacier and crashes into the lake in a trail of dust and ice. These are some of the tallest mountains in the world and form Bhutan's northern boundary with Tibet.
Some distance downstream - the setting for the new 1200 MW Punatsangchhu-I Hydroelectric Project, scheduled to be built in 66 months by Larsen & Toubro (L&T), India’s leading Engineering, Technology and Construction Company - that's if the whole valley isn't washed out by a massive flood caused by overflowing glacial lakes upstream...
The above photo shows the Canadian Ambassador to Bhutan, Joseph Caron, who yesterday presented Bhutan's Foreign Minister with a letter of credit in the amount of $50,000 for earthquake relief. Sometimes a little cash will go a long way to help people...
Once they're gone, no amount of money will bring back the glaciers in Bhutan.
Bhutan's breathtaking "Tiger's Nest"
As a report by Anjali Nayaer in the current edition of Nature News explains in detail, Bhutan is a nation on the brink of disaster, it's geographic landscape in the midst of literally earth-shaking transformation:
Glaciers in the Himalayas are retreating faster than in any other part of the world and they could disappear completely by 2035. This puts the mountainous nation of Bhutan at a special risk. In an area smaller than Switzerland, it has 983 glaciers and 2,794 glacial lakes, some of which have burst to produce deadly glacial lake floods.
A almost unbelievable transformation is underway across the planet, and nowhere is it more all-encompassing than in Bhutan, as the article goes on to explain:
The sounds of global warming are deafening at Thorthormi glacier. Every few minutes, a block of ice rips off the glacier and crashes into the lake in a trail of dust and ice. These are some of the tallest mountains in the world and form Bhutan's northern boundary with Tibet.
Some distance downstream - the setting for the new 1200 MW Punatsangchhu-I Hydroelectric Project, scheduled to be built in 66 months by Larsen & Toubro (L&T), India’s leading Engineering, Technology and Construction Company - that's if the whole valley isn't washed out by a massive flood caused by overflowing glacial lakes upstream...
The above photo shows the Canadian Ambassador to Bhutan, Joseph Caron, who yesterday presented Bhutan's Foreign Minister with a letter of credit in the amount of $50,000 for earthquake relief. Sometimes a little cash will go a long way to help people...
Once they're gone, no amount of money will bring back the glaciers in Bhutan.
Thursday, November 26, 2009
What is the greenmuseum.org?
Fascinating how soon we begin to look back on things that, it seems like, we just started a short time ago. Such is the case with this blog.
When we first started this blog in '07, the Eco Art out there in cyberspace was just beginning to proliferate. We did quite a bit of research into what there was - and one of the more interesting groups we discovered was the California-based greenmuseum.org.
Greenmuseum.org is a non-profit group run completely by volunteers.
The following is adapted from the organization's "about" page.
When we first started this blog in '07, the Eco Art out there in cyberspace was just beginning to proliferate. We did quite a bit of research into what there was - and one of the more interesting groups we discovered was the California-based greenmuseum.org.
Greenmuseum.org is a non-profit group run completely by volunteers.
The following is adapted from the organization's "about" page.
greenmuseum.org, is a 100% volunteer run online museum of environmental art founded in 2001.
"Our goal is to inform, inspire and connect people through environmental art and encourage the creation of new work that serves communities and ecosystems. If you like this site and feel moved to volunteer or contribute to the birth of a sustainable culture, please visit our membership section and join us to support the growth of this movement. We are currently planning a major redesign of the site and a new organizational model to run it with. Stay tuned!"
There are listings of something like 200 artists, numerous online exhibitions and projects, community listings with a calendar and a blog.
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
New Eco Art Painting by Tatiana Iliina: Tailings Pond
Co2 Art is proud to feature another eco art original abstract painting by Tatiana Iliina.
This one is titled "Tailings Pond", from Tatiana's Industrial Waste series.
"...so that's how everything works... ...and then that big river o' water just washes all that gunk outa there and it just goes right inta that huge pond that ya seen when ya flew in... ...it'll sit in that pond maybe a hunnert years... ...then they'll do some tests..."
Tailings Pond is dedicated to the thousands of hectares of once-pristine wilderness that are now covered by standing lakes of chemical soup all over the world.
This one is titled "Tailings Pond", from Tatiana's Industrial Waste series.
"...so that's how everything works... ...and then that big river o' water just washes all that gunk outa there and it just goes right inta that huge pond that ya seen when ya flew in... ...it'll sit in that pond maybe a hunnert years... ...then they'll do some tests..."
Tailings Pond is dedicated to the thousands of hectares of once-pristine wilderness that are now covered by standing lakes of chemical soup all over the world.
Monday, November 23, 2009
Canada ghg emissions per capita 2006 by province - divisive forces coming to bear
Following are the figures on the per capita by province emissions I have extrapolated from bargraphs on a British Columbia government Ministry of the Environment website. After quite a bit of searching around these are the best figures I can readily find.
Carbon Footprint by Province
greenhouse gas emissions per capita by province 2006, in tons of co2 equivalent
Tons of co2 per capita
Alberta 70
British Columbia 14
Manitoba 18
New Brunswick 24
Newfoundland & Labrador 18
Nova Scotia 21
Ontario 15
P.E.I. 15
Quebec 11
Saskatchewan 73
Yukon, Nunavut & N.W.T. 16
Interestingly, most sources for these figures, as well as total ghg emissions by province give graphic images, without showing the data. What is that about?
Interesting to note that B.C. acknowledges 62.3 million tons of co2 emissions in 2006, plus an additional 4 million tons of emissions caused by logging industry deforestation.
What are the total ghg emissions by province?
here are some Stats Canada figures on that, picked up from the Energy Collective website
Again, the figures given are just eyeballed off a bar graph, since the bar graphs appear in umpteen sources on the internet and I am having a tough time finding the actual stats
The numbers show the Greenhouse gas emissions for Canada by province, with the 1990 number first and the 2006 number second.
Emissions are measured in millions of tons of co2 equivalent, and are net, incorporating such factors as deforestation, afforestation, etc.
GHG Emissions 1990 - 2006
Alberta 172 - 236
British Columbia 50 - 66
Manitoba 20 - 22
New Brunswick 19 - 21
Newfoundland & Labrador 12 - 12
Nova Scotia 21 - 22
Ontario 174 - 190
P.E.I. 2 - 2
Quebec 84 - 82
Saskatchewan 45 - 73
Yukon, Nunavut & N.W.T. n/a
Interestingly, some of the federal government sources of information have magically disappeared.
But here is another very interesting set of data - this is the percentage of the Canadian increase in ghg emissions since 1990, by province:
Alberta 50.2%
British Columbia 10.9%
Manitoba 1.9%
New Brunswick <1%>
Newfoundland & Labrador <1%
Nova Scotia <1%
Ontario 13
P.E.I. <1%
Quebec 0% (total decrease of 1%)
Saskatchewan 22.7%
Yukon, Nunavut & N.W.T. 0% (total decrease of 17%)
The above figures also obtained from a chart on the Energy Collective.
A disturbing and divisive fact is beginning to emerge here.
This is that all provinces benefit from their natural resources according to their distribution among the provinces. However, as things are unfolding, it looks like all the citizens of a country are being held accountable for the emissions of the country as a whole.
I can't see this evolving in any way that will be palatable in a context of Canadian unity.
For one thing, we have two provinces, Alberta and Saskatchewan, that are blatantly exposed in terms of per capita and total ghg emissions, especially against 1990 levels.
Alberta residents enjoy zero provincial sales tax and low income tax - so it's not going to look very good if residents of other provinces end up paying Alberta's way...
On the other hand Quebec is at the other extreme, already reducing emissions per 1990 levels. So Quebecers are really going to be hard pressed to agree with propping up any kind of polluting economy in the rest of the country.
Quebec and Alberta. Two provinces with already strong independent tendencies, are only going to find divisive forces running deeper and wider as the continuing climate discussions reveal more facts and the consequences become apparent to the average person.
Carbon Footprint by Province
greenhouse gas emissions per capita by province 2006, in tons of co2 equivalent
Tons of co2 per capita
Alberta 70
British Columbia 14
Manitoba 18
New Brunswick 24
Newfoundland & Labrador 18
Nova Scotia 21
Ontario 15
P.E.I. 15
Quebec 11
Saskatchewan 73
Yukon, Nunavut & N.W.T. 16
Interestingly, most sources for these figures, as well as total ghg emissions by province give graphic images, without showing the data. What is that about?
Interesting to note that B.C. acknowledges 62.3 million tons of co2 emissions in 2006, plus an additional 4 million tons of emissions caused by logging industry deforestation.
What are the total ghg emissions by province?
here are some Stats Canada figures on that, picked up from the Energy Collective website
Again, the figures given are just eyeballed off a bar graph, since the bar graphs appear in umpteen sources on the internet and I am having a tough time finding the actual stats
The numbers show the Greenhouse gas emissions for Canada by province, with the 1990 number first and the 2006 number second.
Emissions are measured in millions of tons of co2 equivalent, and are net, incorporating such factors as deforestation, afforestation, etc.
GHG Emissions 1990 - 2006
Alberta 172 - 236
British Columbia 50 - 66
Manitoba 20 - 22
New Brunswick 19 - 21
Newfoundland & Labrador 12 - 12
Nova Scotia 21 - 22
Ontario 174 - 190
P.E.I. 2 - 2
Quebec 84 - 82
Saskatchewan 45 - 73
Yukon, Nunavut & N.W.T. n/a
Interestingly, some of the federal government sources of information have magically disappeared.
But here is another very interesting set of data - this is the percentage of the Canadian increase in ghg emissions since 1990, by province:
Alberta 50.2%
British Columbia 10.9%
Manitoba 1.9%
New Brunswick <1%>
Newfoundland & Labrador <1%
Nova Scotia <1%
Ontario 13
P.E.I. <1%
Quebec 0% (total decrease of 1%)
Saskatchewan 22.7%
Yukon, Nunavut & N.W.T. 0% (total decrease of 17%)
The above figures also obtained from a chart on the Energy Collective.
A disturbing and divisive fact is beginning to emerge here.
This is that all provinces benefit from their natural resources according to their distribution among the provinces. However, as things are unfolding, it looks like all the citizens of a country are being held accountable for the emissions of the country as a whole.
I can't see this evolving in any way that will be palatable in a context of Canadian unity.
For one thing, we have two provinces, Alberta and Saskatchewan, that are blatantly exposed in terms of per capita and total ghg emissions, especially against 1990 levels.
Alberta residents enjoy zero provincial sales tax and low income tax - so it's not going to look very good if residents of other provinces end up paying Alberta's way...
On the other hand Quebec is at the other extreme, already reducing emissions per 1990 levels. So Quebecers are really going to be hard pressed to agree with propping up any kind of polluting economy in the rest of the country.
Quebec and Alberta. Two provinces with already strong independent tendencies, are only going to find divisive forces running deeper and wider as the continuing climate discussions reveal more facts and the consequences become apparent to the average person.
Quebec has a Plan A and Plan B for Copenhagen
Quebec Environment Minister Line Beauchamp said Friday that Quebec will likely be bringing a Plan B to Copenhagen that will involve the conference recognizing the role of state and provincial governments in the climate change debate, according to a report in the Montreal Gazette Saturday.
Quebec is one of four Canadian provinces, with Ontario, B.C. and Manitoba, representing 80% of the population, and seven U.S. states including California, that have joined the Western Climate Initiative, a group that supports a cap and trade program and is pushing for more ambitious position on greenhouse gas reduction targets. Currently Canada has indicated a target of a 3% emissions reduction on 1990 levels would be acceptable to adopt. Meanwhile, Beauchamp has indicated that Quebec may be setting its sights on a reduction target in the range of 25% or higher.
The lame Canadian target is accentuated by Quebec's strong position. If one considers the second largest province in Canada is targeting a 25% reduction - yet Canada's overall reduction is only 3%, we see that some parts of Canada are, in fact, planning rampant emission increases.
The entire world is basing the Copenhagen talks on 1990 emission levels and Canada's Conservative government is continuing to talk about using 2006 as a baseline.
On December 15 in Copenhagen, Quebec Premier Jean Charest and South Australia Premier Mike Rann will co-chair a leaders summit on climate change. Attendees at this meeting will include California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and French presidential runner up Segolene Royal.
The separatist Parti Quebecois is trying to make hay over Copenhagen, with PQ international relations critic Lise Beaudoin asking Beauchamp how Quebec can go into Copenhagen as a part of the Canadian delegation in good conscience, when Canadian Environment Minister, Jim Prentice, wants the talks to fail.
At this point, Beauchamp indicated that Quebec will likely bring the most ambitious emission target of any any jurisdiction in North America to Copenhagen.
In an interview with Europolitics, we see that the Euros are getting sensitive about the Alberta Tar Sands, as the reporter specifically asked Beauchamp about it:
Quebec is one of four Canadian provinces, with Ontario, B.C. and Manitoba, representing 80% of the population, and seven U.S. states including California, that have joined the Western Climate Initiative, a group that supports a cap and trade program and is pushing for more ambitious position on greenhouse gas reduction targets. Currently Canada has indicated a target of a 3% emissions reduction on 1990 levels would be acceptable to adopt. Meanwhile, Beauchamp has indicated that Quebec may be setting its sights on a reduction target in the range of 25% or higher.
The lame Canadian target is accentuated by Quebec's strong position. If one considers the second largest province in Canada is targeting a 25% reduction - yet Canada's overall reduction is only 3%, we see that some parts of Canada are, in fact, planning rampant emission increases.
The entire world is basing the Copenhagen talks on 1990 emission levels and Canada's Conservative government is continuing to talk about using 2006 as a baseline.
On December 15 in Copenhagen, Quebec Premier Jean Charest and South Australia Premier Mike Rann will co-chair a leaders summit on climate change. Attendees at this meeting will include California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and French presidential runner up Segolene Royal.
The separatist Parti Quebecois is trying to make hay over Copenhagen, with PQ international relations critic Lise Beaudoin asking Beauchamp how Quebec can go into Copenhagen as a part of the Canadian delegation in good conscience, when Canadian Environment Minister, Jim Prentice, wants the talks to fail.
At this point, Beauchamp indicated that Quebec will likely bring the most ambitious emission target of any any jurisdiction in North America to Copenhagen.
In an interview with Europolitics, we see that the Euros are getting sensitive about the Alberta Tar Sands, as the reporter specifically asked Beauchamp about it:
"What is your position on Canada’s use of oil sands?"
Beauchamp's reply was diplomatic:
"No matter what type of industry we are talking about, if it is a strong GHG emitter, then under a ‘cap and trade’ it will have either to invest in reducing emissions or to buy trading allowances. There can be an oil sands industry, but this industry should not in any way hinder Canada from being ambitious in its fight against climate change. Rules should also be imposed on this industry so that it makes its contribution in terms of reducing GHG emissions."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
