lightblueline

Thousands of scientists and a hundred governments yesterday agreed, at least in outline, on plans to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions, in an effort to avoid the worst scenarios for climate change. Meeting in Bangkok, a city vulnerable to even modest sea-level rise, the IPCC's third report of the year offered new insights and a perspective of hope for nations looking to cut their greenhouse emissions. [There is a link to the actual report the end of this blog.] The good news is that the effort's near-term cost is less than three-percent of global GDP. Perhaps the bad news is that current US government administration feels this is too high a price to pay to avoid potentially disastrous climate changes.

The Seattle Times, May 4, 2007, reports:
"At a briefing in Berlin, the U.N.'s top climate change official, Yvo de Boer, said the report 'clearly rebuts fears that economic development and wealth conflict with active protection of the climate.'
Delegates had wrestled over how to share the burden of cutting emissions, how much such measures would cost, and how much weight to give certain policy measures, such as advanced nuclear power, an option supported by the United States.
For many delegates, the strongest message was that reaching the lowest targets could be done at less than 3 percent of the global gross domestic product by 2030 — or 0.12 annually.
That compares favorably to global economic growth that every year has averaged almost 3 percent since 2000. The damage from unabated climate change, meanwhile, might eventually cost the global economy between 5 percent and 20 percent of GDP every year, according to a British government report last year.
'I would say it (the GDP estimates) looks like a reasonable risk to take, compared to the impact of projected climate change,' said Jayant Sathaye, a scientist at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California.
The report follows two studies by the IPCC earlier this year warning that unabated greenhouse gas emissions could drive global temperatures up as much as 11 degrees by 2100, triggering a surge in ocean levels, destruction of vast numbers of species, economic devastation in tropical zones and mass human migrations.
Even the most stringent efforts outlined in the report, however, would not prevent suffering. An increase in temperatures to 3.6 degrees could still subject up to 2 billion people to water shortages by 2050 and threaten extinction for 20 percent to 30 percent of the world's species, the IPCC said.
Environmental groups said the report demonstrates the world can afford to battle global warming and must do so immediately.
'This is a roadmap that the IPCC is delivering,' said Hans Verolme of WWF International. 'It's time for the politicians to do more than just pay lip service to the issue of global warming, and to stop climate change before it's too late.'"
You can read the whole Seattle Times article here:
Scientists say affordable plan to fight climate change is possible

The Los Angeles Times (May 4, 2007) notes that having a road map does not mean every nation is going to follow it, particularly China and the US:
"...the report's call for trillions of dollars to pay for immediate reductions in greenhouse gas emissions make it largely symbolic, experts said.
There is little sign that the United States and China -- which account for nearly half the world's emissions -- would agree to mandatory reductions, they said.
'The notion that all countries are going to sign on tomorrow is ridiculous,' said John Reilly, an economist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
The report, by the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, was released in Bangkok after a week of long, often tedious debates.
It concluded that charging polluters for their emissions -- up to $100 a ton by the year 2030 -- would spur trillions of dollars in investment needed to improve energy efficiency and develop alternatives to fossil fuels.
It offered several scenarios for stabilizing concentrations of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases.
Only one, however, would avoid global warming's worst effects -- dangerous sea level rise, frequent drought and widespread extinctions.
It requires emissions to peak in 15 years and fall to 50% of current levels by mid-century, limiting temperature increases to 3 degrees Fahrenheit.
The concentration of greenhouse gases would be stabilized below 490 parts per million carbon dioxide equivalents -- a measure that factors in the warming effects of all greenhouse gases. The current concentration is about 430 parts per million.
The annual cost of such mitigation would reach 3% of global gross domestic product by the year 2030."

You can read the whole LA Times article here: U.N. panel's new comprehensive global warming strategy is unlikely to succeed

The IPCC report (PDF) is here:
IPCC Working Group III, 2007, Summary for Policy Makers