G20 fails to agree on climate goals in communique

Reposted from NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

JULY 24, 2021

By Paul Homewood

Latest news from G20:

imageimageimage

NAPLES (Reuters) -Energy and environment ministers from the Group of 20 rich nations have failed to agree on the wording of key climate change commitments in their final communique, Italy’s Ecological Transition Minister Roberto Cingolani said on Friday.

The G20 meeting was seen as a decisive step ahead of United Nations climate talks, known as COP 26, which take place in 100 days’ time in Glasgow in November.

The failure to agree common language ahead of that gathering is likely to be seen as a setback to hopes of securing a meaningful accord in Scotland.

Cingolani told reporters that the ministers could not agree on two disputed issues which would now have to be discussed at a G20 summit in Rome in October.

“Commitments made today lack substance and ambition. It is now up to G20 heads of state and government to discard this document at the October leaders’ summit,” said online activist network Avaaz.

Italy holds the rotating presidency of the G20, and Cingolani, as chairman of the two-day gathering, said negotiations with China, Russia and India had proved especially tough.

Cingolani said that in the end China and India had declined to sign the two contested points.

One of these was phasing out coal power, which most countries wanted to achieve by 2025 but some said would be impossible for them.

The other concerned the wording surrounding a 1.5-2 degree Celsius limit on global temperature increases that was set by the 2015 Paris Agreement.

Average global temperatures have already risen by more than 1 degree compared to the pre-industrial baseline used by scientists and are on track to exceed the 1.5-2 degree ceiling.

“Some countries wanted to go faster than what was agreed in Paris and to aim to cap temperatures at 1.5 degrees within a decade, but others, with more carbon based economies, said let’s just stick to what was agreed in Paris,” Cingolani said.

The final communique, which had been due to be published on Friday, would probably not now be released until Saturday, he added.

Ahead of COP 26, environmental activists had hoped that the G20 gathering would lead to a strengthening of climate targets, new commitments on climate financing, and an increase in countries committing to net zero emissions by 2050.

“The G20 is failing to deliver. Italy’s G20 tagline is ‘People, Planet, Prosperity’, but today the G20 is delivering ‘Pollution, Poverty and Paralysis,” said Avaaz.

Cingolani said the G20 had made no new financial commitments, but added that Italy would increase its own climate financing for underdeveloped countries.

https://news.yahoo.com/g20-loath-commit-climate-meeting-132942460.html

Clearly China, Russia and India were never going to commit to give a date for phasing out coal power, as they know their economies depend on it. And while ever Germany carries on using coal, which they plan to until 2038, they will carry on saying get lost.

But more significant is the second sticking point – “Some countries wanted to go faster than what was agreed in Paris and to aim to cap temperatures at 1.5 degrees within a decade, but others, with more carbon based economies, said let’s just stick to what was agreed in Paris”

As we know, the Paris Agreement did nothing whatsoever to cut global emissions. While the 1.5C figure was “agreed” as the objective, the Agreement contained nothing to actually achieving it. On the contrary, developing nations were allowed to carry on increasing emissions, more than cancelling out emissions cuts by developed countries.

What Cingolani’s statement seems to indicate is that many of the G20 countries, even including developed ones, are refusing to improve on their Paris Nationally Determined Contributions, NDCs. These are the pledges made at Paris, detailing and quantifying emissions cuts up to 2030.

With money still a sticking point, any real breakthrough at Glasgow is as far away as ever.

ddd

Like this:

Like Loading…

Related

via Watts Up With That?

https://ift.tt/3zu5W9C

July 24, 2021 at 04:38PM

“69 percent of the affected people fully vaccinated”

“Seventy-one percent of the cases among Massachusetts residents were found to be symptomatic, with 69 percent of the affected people fully vaccinated.” Provincetown Coronavirus Cluster Rises To 430 Cases

via Real Climate Science

https://ift.tt/3rvVtYD

July 24, 2021 at 03:40PM

July 24, 1901

The three hottest July 24’s in the US occurred in 1901, 1934 and 1940. Scientists blamed the 1901 heat on the sun. 24 Jul 1901, Page 1 – The Capital Journal at Newspapers.com 24 Jul 1901, 2 – The Weekly Sentinel at … Continue reading

via Real Climate Science

https://ift.tt/2TAQ6uE

July 24, 2021 at 03:25PM

California’s carbon mitigation efforts may be thwarted by climate change itself

UCI study: Higher heat will limit ecosystem’s role in removing atmospheric CO2

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA – IRVINE

Research News

IMAGEIMAGEIMAGE
IMAGE: REDWOOD FORESTS SUCH AS THIS ONE IN CALIFORNIA’S HUMBOLDT COUNTY ARE KEY COMPONENTS OF THE STATE’S CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION EFFORTS, BUT UCI RESEARCHERS SUGGEST THAT ONGOING GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS MAY… view more CREDIT: SHANE COFFIELD / UCI

Irvine, Calif., July 22, 2021 – To meet an ambitious goal of carbon neutrality by 2045, California’s policymakers are relying in part on forests and shrublands to remove CO2 from the atmosphere, but researchers at the University of California, Irvine warn that future climate change may limit the ecosystem’s ability to perform this service.

In a paper published today in the American Geophysical Union journal AGU Advances, the UCI Earth system scientists stressed that rising temperatures and uncertain precipitation will cause a decrease in California’s natural carbon storage capacity of as much as 16 percent under an extreme climate projection and of nearly 9 percent under a more moderate scenario.

“This work highlights the conundrum that climate change poses to the state of California,” said lead author Shane Coffield, a UCI Ph.D. candidate in Earth system science. “We need our forests and other plant-covered areas to provide a ‘natural climate solution’ of removing carbon dioxide from the air, but heat and drought caused by the very problem we’re trying to solve could make it more difficult to achieve our objectives.”

Trees and plants draw CO2 from the atmosphere when they photosynthesize, and some of the carbon ends up stored in their biomass or the soil. California’s climate strategy depends in part on enhanced carbon storage to offset some of the emissions from transportation, power generation and other sources. The combination of this natural carbon sequestration system and measures to promote green energy is hoped to help the state reach its target of not contributing net carbon to the environment by 2045.

But the UCI scientists suggest that an even more aggressive approach to curtailing emissions may be necessary.

“The emissions scenario that we follow will have a large effect on the carbon storage potential of our forests,” said co-author James Randerson, who holds the Ralph J. & Carol M. Cicerone Chair in Earth System Science at UCI. “A more moderate emissions scenario in which we convert to more renewable energy sources leads to about half of the ecosystem carbon [sequestration] loss compared to a more extreme emissions scenario.”

Coffield said that current climate models are not in agreement about California’s future precipitation, but it’s probable that the northern part of the state will get wetter and the southern part drier. He also said that coastal areas of Central and Northern California and low- and mid-elevation mountain areas – sites of large offset projects – are the most likely to lose some of their carbon sequestration powers over the next several decades.

In addition, the researchers were able to estimate the effects of climate change on specific tree species. They project that coast redwoods will be constrained to the far northern part of their range by the end of the century and that hotter, drier conditions will favor oak trees at the expense of conifers.

While the study used statistical modeling to peer into the future of the state’s ecosystems, the research also highlights the importance of present-day drought and wildfire as key mechanistic drivers of carbon sequestration losses. Other studies have estimated that the 2012-2015 drought killed more than 40 percent of ponderosa pines in the Sierra Nevada range. Another issue the researchers describe is the loss of trees from California’s worsening wildfire situation.

“We hope that this work will inform land management and climate policies so that steps can be taken to protect existing carbon stocks and tree species in the most climate-vulnerable locations,” Randerson said. “Effective management of fire risk is essential for limiting carbon [sequestration] losses throughout much of the state.”

###

Joining Coffield and Randerson on this project were Kyle Hemes, from the Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment at Stanford University; Charles Koven, from the Climate & Ecosystem Sciences Division at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory; and Michael Goulden, UCI professor of Earth system science and ecology & evolutionary biology. The study received funding from the National Science Foundation, the UC National Laboratory Fees Research Program, and the California Strategic Growth Council’s Climate Change Research Program.

From EurekAlert!

Like this:

Like Loading…

Related

via Watts Up With That?

https://ift.tt/3eS6PAU

July 24, 2021 at 12:52PM