The ol' Merkel smirkel. Image by א, Wikimedia CommonsBERLIN -- German Chancellor Angela Merkel said on Tuesday she would only attend the Copenhagen climate conference in December if the U.S., China, and India first make clear their negotiating positions.

"The European Union has developed clear and unambiguous negotiating positions. We now want contributions from the U.S. and from countries like China and India," Merkel said in the first major policy speech of her second term.

"I will make a special personal effort to achieve this. And of course if it is successful, yes, I will go to Copenhagen," Merkel said.

She added:

A failure of the world climate conference in Copenhagen in December would set international environmental efforts back by years. We cannot afford this.

A substantial political agreement is indispensable in order to create conditions for a binding international protocol for after 2013. Time is pressing.

The aim of the Copenhagen summit is to hammer out an accord for 2013 onwards that will include emission cuts and aid to help poorer countries develop low-carbon economies and deal with the ravages of climate change.

Forty heads of state or government, including British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and French President Nicolas Sarkozy, have indicated they will attend the climax of the Dec. 7-18 talks in the Danish capital.

But with signs growing that the get-together will fall short of achieving a binding, historic pact, it is unclear whether other leaders, most notably President Obama, will show up.

Washington has been reluctant to declare its hand while a climate bill inches through Congress.

An E.U. summit in late October agreed that developing nations will need 100 billion euros ($146 billion) per year by 2020 to tackle climate change, but leaders from the 27 nation bloc failed to nail down how much it would give.

Related Links:

State of the Climate Movement: Can fasting and asceticism save the world?

China, India, U.S. commit to seal Copenhagen deal

Chuck Norris on Copenhagen

Berlin wall. Photo courtesy GothPhil via Flickr WASHINGTON -- German Chancellor Angela Merkel on Tuesday urged the U.S. Congress to take action on climate change, likening the struggle against global warming to the Berlin Wall.

In a rare address to a joint session of Congress marking the fall of the Berlin Wall 20 years ago, Merkel said next month's high-stakes climate summit in Copenhagen hinged on strong U.S. and European commitments.

"I'm convinced, just as we found the strength in the 20th century to bring about the fall of a wall made of concrete and barbed wire, we shall now show that necessary strength to overcome the walls of the 21st century," Merkel said.  She said those were "walls in our minds, walls of short-sighted self-interest, walls between the present, and the future."

The German leader reiterated Western nations' stance that any new climate treaty needed commitments from fast-growing emerging economies such as China and India.

"But I'm convinced that once we in Europe and America show ourselves ready to adopt binding agreements, we will also be able to persuade China and India to join in," she said.  "Then in Copenhagen we shall be able to overcome this wall separating the present and future in the interest of our children and grandchildren, and in the interest of sustainable development all over the world."

Merkel's remarks drew a standing ovation from lawmakers from Democrats, but some Republicans remained seated.

She spoke hours after a key U.S. Senate committee opened a critical debate on climate change with a boycott by most Republicans.

The House of Representatives in June approved the first-ever U.S. plan to mandate curbs on carbon emissions, but the bill is facing obstacles in the Senate, decreasing chances of passage before the Copenhagen summit.

Obama supports a so-called cap-and-trade system to mandate curbs in carbon emissions, a sharp change from his predecessor Bush, whose stance alienated European leaders.

Related Links:

Climate Hope: Inspiring 2009 Books for Clean Energy

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

Obama going to Copenhagen

Since the new center-right coalition won the elections a few weeks ago in Germany, onlookers from the U.S. have been expecting the country to drastically cut its support for solar. Proponents of U.S.-style policies, such as tax credits and Renewable Portfolio Standards, have also been hinting that Germany will be yet another example of how the solely production-based "feed-in rates" can overheat a system. (Germany will install close to two gigawatts of solar this year. When Spain installed 2.5 gigawatts last year, the Spanish considered the market overheated and imposed a ceiling of 500 megawatts per year.)

But finally, word is trickling out in English that the new governing coalition does not in fact plan to slash solar. An unnamed source told Reuters that rates might be cut by "around 15 percent," but not 30 percent in line with the fall in module prices. (The rates would already automatically drop by between 9 and 12 percent, so 15 percent is not much of a jump.)

This news comes as no surprise to those of us who have been following events in German. You might expect Germany's Energy Consumer Association, a watchdog organization that regularly takes utilities to court for raising prices (and often wins), to oppose FITs because they also raise electricity rates. It doesn't. In fact, the organization even explains why the rates for solar should not chase after module prices in the following press release (my translation):

October 8, 2009. The Association of German Energy Consumers opposes a drastic cut in compensation for PV arrays. A dramatic reduction in the feed-in rate would be fatal for the PV sector and destroy the momentum of previous years overnight.

The billions paid by consumers to set up the PV sector would have lead nowhere, and the future of the industry would be uncertain.

Over the past few months, prices for PV arrays have fallen faster than manufacturers have been able to reduce production costs. These firms are therefore in financial trouble, and there have already been a number of bankruptcies. In China, two-thirds of PV firms disappeared altogether. Politicians need to deal with this situation responsibly.

The Association of German Energy Consumers calls for the feed-in system to be maintained as it has proven to be successful.

Can you imagine any such watchdog group in the U.S. supporting the most expensive form of renewable electricity? Welcome to Germany.

The reason why Germany has been so successful with renewables is because there is such widespread consent. For instance, if you are expecting the newly elected Christian Democrats to oppose solar, then you obviously missed this statement made in an interview by the CDU politician "tipped to become federal environment minister":

Any sudden change would be wrong. It is true that solar arrays have become much cheaper because the market collapsed. So we do have some leeway to reduce rates. But we have to be prudent about it -- it has to be based on a market analysis. We cannot chase after the market by ramping rates up and down every six months. The solar market still needs proper incentives for people to want to install the systems.

Of course, there are two parties to the coalition, so you certainly would expect the libertarian FDP to oppose not only generous support for solar, but all kinds of government intervention. You would be wrong. A member of an E.U. organization sent me a PDF of the FDP's documents it is using in negotiations with the CDU for the new coalition. From page two of the FDP's political platform on environmental, agricultural, and consumer protection issues:

"We will continue to promote the expansion of renewables in accordance with current targets, retain the Renewable Energy Act and the unlimited feed-in priority, and make these subsidies more efficient."

The "unlimited feed-in priority" means that renewable energy has to be accepted on the grid; if necessary, coal, nuclear, and natural gas plants simply have to be ramped down. (The part about making feed-in rates "more efficient" is a bunch of blah blah blah.)  Most importantly, this paper clearly states that the FDP will retain the Renewable Energy Act.

I could not find the word "solar" or "photovoltaics" in the document at all. Otherwise, the FDP only emphasizes that Germany has made too many mistakes in the field of biomass/biofuels, so support will be increased (again, via feed-in rates), and too little has been done in the heat sector. If you were expecting an attack on solar, the document is disappointing.

Now imagine one of our two parties in the U.S. ousting the other party in the elections but nonetheless maintaining the previous party's successful policy for renewables. I can imagine them doing so only to protect U.S. jobs -- and indeed, North American renewables policies are increasingly protectionist, with support given only to systems made locally. You now might expect Germany to follow suit, but the German Solar Association (DGS) has come out against the idea that some protectionist measures should be introduced in the country's Renewable Energy Act to protect German companies from unfair competition from abroad, especially Asia. As the DGS put it, "German manufacturers have to compete with quality, longer warranties, and better service."

Now imagine solar proponents and environmental organizations in the U.S. saying that U.S. solar companies are simply going to have to learn to compete.

So there you have it -- the German solar market is apparently not going to collapse like Spain's did. There simply is no real opposition to renewables over here any longer. Don't believe me? Then check out this weather report from a few days ago, in which the weatherman starts off by showing a map of Germany and some superimposed wind turbines. He then explains that the overall output was going to increase drastically over the next 24 hours, producing some 11 gigawatts at times.

How much is that? "As much as 11 nuclear power plants," the weatherman said. (Germany only has 17 left, and one of them doesn't work.)

Now imagine a U.S. weatherman subtly fighting for wind and against nuclear -- and no one bats an eye.

Welcome to Germany.

Related Links:

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

Freeing the grid

Why solar energy trumps coal power

BFFs: German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Nicolas SarkozyPhoto: Chesi - Fotos CCPARIS - The leaders of Germany and France called Friday for the United Nations to support a carbon tax on imports from countries who fail to back international efforts to fight global warming.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angela Merkel wrote to U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon arguing that states that fail to back a deal at a climate summit in Copenhagen in December should be held accountable.

"It would be unacceptable for the efforts of the most ambitious countries to be undermined by the carbon emissions released by lack of or insufficient action by other countries," reads the letter released by the French presidency.

"For that reason, it should be possible to put in place appropriate adjustment measures targeting the countries that do not implement or fail to support this accord," they wrote.

The two leaders also pleaded for the creation of a world environmental agency, with as a first step the emergence of new institutions that would "encourage the emergence of a body of international environmental law."

The Dec. 7-18 meeting under the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) aims to set down action for tackling heat-trapping carbon emissions beyond 2012, when the provisions of the Kyoto Protocol run out.

Representatives of the world's 17 biggest carbon polluters kicked off a week of high-stakes talks on climate change Thursday with a discussion aimed at bridging differences ahead of the Copenhagen talks.

Sarkozy, whose government is to introduce a carbon levy on domestic fuel emissions in 2010, has repeatedly argued for a European Union carbon tax on imports from regions with poor environmental standards.

Germany had yet to come out in favour of a carbon tax on imports, which a German minister has warned could be perceived by developing nations as a form of "eco-imperialism."

The European Union prides itself on being at the forefront of the climate fight.

But developing countries such as India and China argue rich countries ought to shoulder the main responsibility for mitigating global warming as they have historically emitted most of the greenhouse gases at the root of the problem.

The French and German leaders said the New York talks should secure "binding and ambitious commitments from developed countries" in line with a Group of Eight target to slash emissions by 80 percent by 2050 compared to 1990 levels.

Developing nations, meanwhile, should pledge to "reduce the growth in emissions compared to current levels" within an agreed timeframe, and to publish "carbon sober growth plans" by 2012.

They also called for world leaders to agree on ways to provide financial and technological support for developing countries in their struggle to rein in carbon dioxide emissions.

Related Links:

State of the Climate Movement: Can fasting and asceticism save the world?

China, India, U.S. commit to seal Copenhagen deal

Chuck Norris on Copenhagen

Here’s one thing citizens of the United States, Iraq, and the Palestinian territories have in common: According to a new 19-country public opinion poll on climate change, they’re the least likely to want more action on the issue from their governments.

American citizens showed the least interest of all the countries in response to this question: “How high a priority do you think the government should place on addressing climate change?”

The poll released today by WorldPublicOpinion.org covered 19 nations that include the world’s largest greenhouse-gas emitters and together comprise 60 percent of the world’s population. A total of 18,578 respondents were asked about what their government is already doing, what it should be doing, and how high a priority their fellow citizens consider addressing climate change to be.

The U.S. respondents also scored lowest when they were asked to rank from 1 to 10, “How high a priority does the government [currently] place on addressing climate change?”

Taken together, the two questions suggest that 52 percent of Americans want their government to do more than it currently is on the issue. In 15 of the 19 nations, majorities said their government should make addressing climate change a higher priority.

The survey also found most people underestimate the amount of support their peers have for addressing the shared threat of climate change. In other words, your neighbors are probably more willing than you think to support a climate plan. Respondents across all countries estimated that their peers gave climate change a 6.42 priority (10 being the highest priority). In fact, the average priority was higher—7.33.

Worldpublicopinion.org director Steven Kull says the sociological term for this common phenomenon is “pluralistic ignorance.”

“This is a sort of general tendency people have to underestimate others in terms of readiness to take action to address collective problems” said Kull, a political psychologist who leads the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland. “It makes people feel good to think that they are more advanced than others, socially and intellectually. That they can better see the need for addressing long-term problems.”

While this poll focused on average citizens (see the full results methodology [PDF]), previous polls found that political leaders consistently underestimate the support of their citizens for addressing complex, long-term problems such as climate change. The same group’s 2004 Hall of Mirrors study [PDF] found that 71 percent of the public favored ratifying the Kyoto Protocol on climate change. However, only 38 percents of U.S. leaders (senior congressional staffers, Bush administration officials, and leaders in business, labor, and media) estimated that a majority of the public would support it. Only 28 percent of leaders estimated that it would be a large majority.

Leaders may be making the same miscalculation about this year’s climate and energy debate, Kull said. He took issue with polls that ask participants to rank a series of issues from most to least important, such as a Pew Research Center project in January.

“Americans consistently say that more should be done [on climate change],” he said. “At the same time if you give them a list of priorities [to rank] climate tends not to be one that they rank as one of the most important.”

Prioritization polls don’t account for the fact that Americans may want significant action on a lot of issues, he said.

China’s strong interest in government climate action is consistent with the findings of other research, said Kull, who has conducted focus-group polling in the country. Even when told by their government that climate change is the responsibility of industrialized nations, Chinese tend to support national action, he said.

“They generally have a kind of can-do attitude,” he said. “They also perceive that their economy is growing so much that they feel like they can afford the costs related to addressing climate change.”

Mexico’s position as the most supportive of government action surprised Kull, and he said he didn’t have a ready interpretation for it.

German participants had the strongest perception that their government was doing a lot on climate. Only 46 percent of Germans wanted their government to do more. Respondents from two other leading emitters--India and Russia--fell in the middle on support for government action.

Polls were conducted by different research centers in each country, and Kull cautioned against making too much of country-to-country comparisons. “We can’t exactly say that everybody relates to this 0-10 scale in the same way,” he said.

The survey relied on respondents’ current knowledge of the issue--each of the three questions used the phrase “addressing climate change” without explaining the threats of climate change or the benefits of stopping it. The survey was conducted from April to early July and had a margin of error of 3 to 4 percentage points.

Related Links:

The U.S.-India climate ‘partnership’

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

Obama going to Copenhagen

NIMBY, meet NUMBY: Not under my backyard.

The Guardian reports today:

It was meant to be the world's first demonstration of a technology that could help save the planet from global warming -- a project intended to capture emissions from a coal-fired power station and bury them safely underground.

But the German carbon capture plan has ended with CO2 being pumped directly into the atmosphere, following local opposition at it being stored underground.

Ouch. Perhaps CCS is just another (open) pipe dream.

CCS was never going to be a slam dunk. As I explained a year ago, "CCS has four fundamental problems that have reduced enthusiasm for it recently and limited its likely role":

On timing, I wrote last September that "the first moderate-sized (30 MW) pilot plant with CCS just started up this month in Germany." So it was quite a shock to learn:

Vattenfall's Schwarze Pumpe project in Spremberg, northern Germany, launched in a blaze of publicity last September, was a beacon of hope, the first scheme to link the three key stages of trapping, transporting and burying the greenhouse gases.

The Swedish company, however, surprised a recent conference when it admitted that the €70m (£60.3m) project was venting the CO2 straight into the atmosphere. "It was supposed to begin injecting by March or April of this year but we don't have a permit. This is a result of the local public having questions about the safety of the project," said Staffan Gortz, head of carbon capture and storage communication at Vattenfall. He said he did not expect to get a permit before next spring: "People are very, very sceptical."

The spread of localised resistance is a force that some fear could sink Europe's attempts to build 10 to 12 demonstration projects for carbon capture and storage (CCS) by 2015. The plan had been to transport up to 100,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide from the power plant each year and inject it into depleted gas reservoirs at a giant gasfield near the Polish border....

Stuart Haszeldine, a CCS expert at the University of Edinburgh, warned of the danger of opposition towards CCS snowballing into a "bandwagon of negativity" if too many early projects were rejected. "Once you've screwed up one or two of them, people are going to think ‘if they rejected this in Barendrecht, there must be a reason'," he said.

People should think of CCS as a post-2025 solution (at best), worthy of R&D and demonstration funding, especially for projects that include biomass cofiring.

But we need massive deployment of low-carbon technology now, and that means efficiency, conservation, recycled energy, natural gas, wind, solar PV, concentrated solar thermal with storage, geothermal, biomass....

Related Links:

Merkel threatens no-show at Copenhagen climate talks

German leader likens the struggle against global warming to the Berlin Wall

Why solar won’t topple in Germany

Angela MerkelPhoto: Bertelsmann StiftungThe climate bill being debated today in the U.S. House represents a "sea change" and "points to the fact that the United States [is] very serious on climate," said German Chancellor Angela Merkel during a visit to the White House this morning. "I wish you every success. ... I would not have thought [it] possible a year ago," she continued.

Speaking at a joint press conference after private talks with Obama, Merkel said the president's work on climate change is laying the groundwork for successful climate-treaty negotiations later this year in Denmark: "I'm very gratified to note that the president feels 100 percent committed to this issue, which has become apparent in all of our talks. He wants to see to it that Copenhagen becomes a success."

Obama reiterated his support for the House climate bill at the press conference: "I think that this legislation that we are seeking to pass indicates enormous progress from where we have been ... I'm very proud of the progress that's being made ... If we can get that framework in place, I'm confident the United States can be an important partner in this process" of international climate negotiations.

From Obama's opening statement:

From Merkel's opening statement (through a translator):

At Obama's press conference earlier this week, the U.S. press corps didn't bother to ask a single question about climate and energy. But at today's event, a German reporter stepped up to the plate with a climate question (also via a translator):

Obama's response:

Merkel's response:

Related Links:

State of the Climate Movement: Can fasting and asceticism save the world?

China, India, U.S. commit to seal Copenhagen deal

Chuck Norris on Copenhagen

California's East Bay -- the collection of towns, cities, and suburbs across the Bay Bridge from San Francisco -- has a lot to boast about. There's the perpetually great weather, enlightened inhabitants, and a halfway decent, if in my opinion overpriced, public transit system in the form of BART. Yet despite BART's 43 stations spanning 95 miles, most folks in the area find they need a car, too.

Sherman LewisBut one man thinks his town, Hayward -- or at least a part of it -- can make the leap to automobile-free. "I want to live a lifestyle that's less dependent on cars," says Sherman Lewis, a retired poli-sci professor at Cal State East Bay and president of the Hayward Area Planning Association since 1978. But, he admits, he's chosen a relatively difficult way to achieve it, "by trying find 950 other families who want to live the same way."

Lewis has developed plans for Quarry Village, a 1,000-unit development about a mile from the Hayward BART station and a short skip from the Cal State campus and downtown Hayward. It includes townhouses, condos, walking paths, shuttle buses to the rail ... and no garages. It would fill 22 acres on a former rock quarry (hence the name) currently owned by Caltrans, the California DOT; the land is not yet for sale, but Lewis says the agency is supportive of his redevelopment vision. The residences will be officially affordable, at least by Hayward's definition: studios to six-bedrooms between $250,000 and $650,000. Lewis believes the larger units will appeal to telecommuters, who can use the extra bedrooms as offices.

Today a quarry, tomorrow a car-free revolution?QuarryVillage.comInside the development, residents would be able to walk to basic amenities -- a restaurant or two, a well-stocked grocery store. For other needs, they could take an on-site shuttle to BART, use the shared or rental car services that would be available, or, if they really want, rent one of the 100 or so parking spots along the perimeter of the neighborhood. Those spots would be auctioned off, starting at perhaps $125 a month, to help subsidize the shuttle service. No one need fear being judged for not giving up his or her car, Lewis assures. "They're going to be congratulated, " he says," because their money will go to pay for everyone else's bus."

The Quarry Village vision is inspired in part by the Vauban development in Freiburg, Germany, a 6,000-resident suburb where parking is limited to the perimeter and a space goes for $40,000. Some seventy percent of Vauban-ers don't own a car, and by all accounts they seem to have adjusted quite easily.

But that's Europe. Are Americans -- some of whom say their car represents them more than their friends of clothes -- ready for the car-free experience?

Well, maybe. Car-sharing, it was reported last week, is on the rise, with city policies and real estate developments encouraging the practice. (I find ZipCar, at $120 per weekend day here in New York, to be prohibitively expensive, but perhaps I'm spoiled by my bicycle and my $2 subway). Quebec-based CommunAuto asserts that every shared car knocks eight off the road -- that's about 1,800 fewer miles driven per person each year.

So the political climate is ripe for Quarry Village, and perhaps the mindset of many Americans, still stinging from our brief foray into $4 per gallon gas, has properly adjusted. "We have more than 100 people [ready] to sign up to buy these units when they become available," says Lewis.

But when will that be? At the end of May, the Hayward Planning Commission gave the thumbs up to new zoning, permitting higher density and less parking, and Lewis expects the city council to overwhelmingly approve SMU zoning -- sustainable mixed-use -- at the end of June, which Lewis says was created with Quarry Village in mind.

If you lived here, you'd be ooh-ing now.QuarryVillage.com"The city council is unanimously supportive, but all of us are concerned about getting investors and selling units fast enough," says Lewis. That's right, they're still lacking one key component: the money to actually create the neighborhood, despite plenty of interest and excitement. The tagline displayed prominently on the Quarry Village website sums up the current state of the project: "If you'll come, we can build it."

Related Links:

More NYC farmers markets accept food stamps and sales soar

Is there a tradeoff between economics and the environment?

Home Economics of the JP Green House, Part 1

Each time I set out to pen one of my climate-news poems, I try really hard not to make it bouncy and rhyming. But terrible bouncy rhymes seem to flow in my veins. It’s a curse, to write such verse! So this week I promised myself I’d experiment with blank verse—and hey, why not dabble in a little friendly plagiarism while I’m at it. Without the knowledge or permission of fellow climate-news summarizer Eric Roston, I’ve repurposed the quite lovely introduction to his most recent column. Because he’s a poet and he don’t ... uh ... recognize it.

The U.S. Congress fast-tracks climate legislation,
international negotiators hash through
the first “negotiating text”
for year-end global talks in Germany,
and big businesses start counting their carbon.

The pile of climate stories this week
climbed
faster
than
predicted New England sea levels.

No shore thing.Helvetiq via flickr

Related Links:

Copenhagen talks ready for take off: 5, 4, 3…

Newtongate: the final nail in the coffin of Enlightenment thinking

John McCain’s troubles are the world’s troubles

Related Links:

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

Climate Hope: Inspiring 2009 Books for Clean Energy

What Do Coal and Dirty Dorm Rooms Have in Common?

BERLIN, Nov 26 -- German Chancellor Angela Merkel urged the EU Wednesday not to water down its climate protection goals in the face of a global recession and called for a worldwide deal on slashing CO2 emissions.

"I say here very clearly that I do not believe it would be right to sacrifice the well-founded climate goals of the European Union," Merkel told parliament during a debate on the federal budget.

The EU has fixed an ambitious triple objective for itself to achieve by 2020 the so-called 20-20-20 goals: a 20 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from 1990 levels, bringing renewable energy use up to 20 percent of the total, and an overall cut of 20 percent in energy use.

Merkel originally launched the climate change/energy plan during Germany's EU presidency last year.

"That was our goal and that remains our goal," Merkel said.

A compromise on a binding deal may be reached on the issue during an EU summit in Brussels in mid-December.

The current text calls for some energy-intensive industries to pay for pollution rights starting in 2013.

Nearly 10,000 European firms currently benefit each year from free emissions rights when they exceed authorised pollution levels and some have called for diluting the EU plan until the economic crisis has passed.

Making companies pay for those rights is particularly contested in Germany, which is still home to several heavy industries, in particular the chemicals sector.

An unpublished economy ministry report leaked to the German press Tuesday said Germany could lose more than 100,000 jobs if the EU makes industries pay for pollution rights that are free at present.

Merkel acknowledged that Europe should not hobble itself in international competition considering that "outside Europe there is no (emission-rights) certificates system on a major scale".

"This must be negotiated... so jobs are not endangered," she said.

She said Germany was "pleased" that US president-elect Barack Obama "makes the impression that he is more open to climate protection" than President George W. Bush.

"We will have many opportunities to test that out this year and next year but we of course need an even playing field worldwide," she said.

The Polish city of Poznan will host a UN climate conference from December 1-12 to prepare the ground for talks in Copenhagen in December 2009 to complete a draft international treaty on cutting greenhouse gas emissions.

The aim of the international accord, which will be the most complex and ambitious environmental deal ever attempted, is also to channel funds, technology and expertise to poor countries bearing the brunt of climate change.

Copyright 2008 -- Agence France-Presse

Related Links:

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

Obama going to Copenhagen

Fair, Ambitious & Binding: Essentials for a Successful Climate Deal

Related Links:

Is there a tradeoff between economics and the environment?

‘Heretic’ battles straw man

Top 25 reasons to give a damn about climate change

Industrialized countries have promised to put more than $6.1 billion in the World Bank's Climate Investment Funds, which aim to boost clean technologies and reduce greenhouse-gas emissions in developing countries. On Friday, the United States pledged $2 billion over three years; Britain will chip in $1.47 billion and Japan $1.2 billion, with contributions from Australia, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, and Switzerland making up the rest. Two trust funds will be created under the Climate Investment Fund umbrella: The Clean Technology Fund will invest in projects that "contribute to the demonstration, deployment, and transfer of low-carbon technologies" and "have a significant potential for long-term greenhouse-gas savings"; the Strategic Climate Fund will "serve as an overarching fund for various programs to test innovative approaches to climate change." The World Bank will announce the first beneficiaries of the funds in early 2009.

Related Links:

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

Obama going to Copenhagen

Fair, Ambitious & Binding: Essentials for a Successful Climate Deal

Germany will next week open the world's first "clean coal" plant actually ready to capture and store its carbon-dioxide emissions. The 30-megawatt, $100 million Schwarze Pumpe demonstration plant will burn coal in an atmosphere of oxygen instead of regular air, producing some 10 tons per hour of compressed CO2 that can be captured and buried under a depleted gas field. (Such "oxyfuel combustion" technology is different from the integrated gasification combined cycle systems being pursued in the U.S.) While the project is a step forward for "clean coal," a full-scale system is many years and many dollars away. By the by, "clean coal" is both oxymoronic and plain ol' moronic; as one Greenpeace activist sums up, "Our concern is that this technology is used to justify the construction of more coal power plants. It's too expensive, it will come too late, and it will divert money from the real solutions, renewable energies and energy efficiency." Not to mention that whole leveling-mountains thing.

Related Links:

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

Climate Hope: Inspiring 2009 Books for Clean Energy

What Do Coal and Dirty Dorm Rooms Have in Common?

Related Links:

Chuck Norris on Copenhagen

The U.S.-India climate ‘partnership’

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

The European Union is running out of landfill space and faces a looming trash problem. All member nations have been directed to reduce landfill-bound trash 35 percent of 1995 levels by 2020, but many nations have slim chances of meeting that target; Italy, Spain, Greece, and Britain currently send more than 60 percent of their rubbish to landfills. Hopefully, E.U. trash laggards will look to the example of Hamburg, Germany: the city sent the majority of its garbage to landfills until 2000, when it decided to invest in top-notch recycling programs and low-polluting incinerators. Today, Hamburg produces less garbage than it did 10 years ago, despite population growth. The city recently agreed to a short-term deal to take 700 tons of garbage a day from Naples, Italy, where the streets are overflowing with refuse that the mafia-controlled trash industry has elected not to pick up.

Related Links:

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

Obama going to Copenhagen

A 12-day United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity ended Friday with just a wee bit of progress toward salvaging the world's rapidly disappearing flora and fauna. Perhaps most encouraging: The 191 countries present agreed to ban the controversial practice of seeding the ocean with nutrients to encourage growth of carbon-sucking algae. In addition, Germany, which hosted the conference, agreed to spend $785 million on forest preservation by 2013 and an equal sum annually after that. Indonesia said it will create a 77,000-square-mile marine protected area, the largest in the world; Bosnia, Malaysia, and the Democratic Republic of Congo also agreed to create nature preserves. But those relatively small steps forward aren't nearly enough, say critics, pointing out that three species go extinct every hour. "Of course we achieved less than we should have given the dimension of the problems," admits German Environment Minister Sigmar Gabriel. "Achieving unanimity among 191 states is difficult."

Related Links:

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

Obama going to Copenhagen

‘Copenhagen Diagnosis’ offers a grim update to the IPCC’s climate science

Related Links:

Is there a tradeoff between economics and the environment?

John McCain’s troubles are the world’s troubles

‘Heretic’ battles straw man

Related Links:

Ask Umbra on ditching dirty things

On “climategate”

Climate Hope: Inspiring 2009 Books for Clean Energy

Related Links:

Newtongate: the final nail in the coffin of Enlightenment thinking

Top 25 reasons to give a damn about climate change

The Wind Kids: How high school students helped bring a wind farm to Milford, Utah