*** Sent by Avaaz supporter and volunteer Duncan Maru ***
Climate change will certainly be one of the top agenda
items at the G8 summit during the first week of July, but the
real question is whether the G8 leaders will actually take decisive
action to stop global warming. Leaders from each of the G8 countries
have frittered away most of the momentum gained in 2007 and continue
to avoid the pressing need to make binding, national targets to
decrease carbon
emissions. All the important innovations and
ideas aimed at reducing global warming--from wind energy to fuel
efficiency to changes in consumer behavior --can not be effective
unless
countries make the firm, immediate, political commitment to reduce
carbon emissions. This meeting, a prelude to the
broader G8 summit next month, marks a critical juncture at which the
world's most powerful-- and polluting-- countries can start to take
leadership on the issue.
Host country Japan plays a particularly
central role here, and there is some reason for optimism. A recent Pew global attitudes poll showed that the
66% of Japanese citizens are concerned "a great deal" about global
warming--the highest total among the countries surveyed (the same
figure was 19% in the United States and 26% in Britain) [1]. Within
the government, the Environment Ministry supports mandatory, national
caps on carbon emissions. The Ministry of Economy, Trade and
Industry, however, opposes these critical policy changes [2]. Japan's Prime Minister, Yasuo Fukuda, is the key to shaping his
administration's ultimate stance on it, and it looks presently as if
he is leaning the wrong way -- on the side of the
Trade Ministry [3]. Avaaz members need to
show Mr. Fukuda that the global community supports the Japanese public
and his colleagues in the Environment Ministry in
trying to achieve aggressive policy action in Japan.
Why is this important? Most Avaaz members are well
aware of the pressing need for action on climate change, but let's
briefly recap. To avoid a greater than 2 degrees Celsius increase in
global temperatures
over pre-industrial levels, the scientific consensus is that
greenhouse gases must be limited to 450 parts per million carbon dioxide over the next
century [4]-- though some argue that even this figure may be too
high and it should be as low as 350
ppm [5]. To achieve this and avoid
environmental
catastrophe, action must be taken swiftly [6,7].
Countries would need to reach a 60-80% reduction in carbon emissions over 1990
levels by 2050 [4]. An important graphic from the
journal Science, showing clearly that if we
continue to fail to act (blue line), the rate of carbon emissions we
will need to achieve the desired greenhouse gas level may be out of reach [4]:

Unfortunately, our current trajectory is looking more like the blue
line than the red. To get to where we need to be in 2050, the G8 and
other highly industrialized countries must reduce carbon emissions
25-40% of 1990 levels by 2020 [8].
While scientific innovation is critical, the key
next political step is for each of the G8 countries to take the lead
and enact binding (mandatory), national caps on emissions at these
levels.
The non-EU members-- Russia, Canada, United
States, Canada, and Japan-- have been particularly slow to move
on this. Other proposals that include voluntary or sectoral caps fail
to guarantee that these literally earth-saving emissions reductions
can be reached.
Although the specific, technical
aspects of carbon emissions reductions schemes are debatable, allowing
companies to choose to reduce their emissions leaves too little to
chance in an area where there is so much at stake. For example,
a group of American researchers showed that
mandatory caps on two acid rain polluters-- Sulfur Dioxide and
Nitrogen Oxides-- each were reduced over 25% from 1991 to 2002 in the
United States. In contrast, carbon dioxide, subject to voluntary
standards, rose 25% during the same period [9,10]. Clearly, under a
voluntary carbon dioxide regime, the United States went in the wrong
direction. The experience of Canada also has shown that, despite a
relatively strong popular and political will to enact change,
voluntary caps failed to achieve its Kyoto goals
[11].
Unfortunately, Fukuda's seems to currently favor the Trade Ministry's
strategy and is considering largely voluntary, sectoral-- that is,
targets set within specific industries rather than at a national
level-- targets. Furthermore, they recently announced that
they would aim for a 14% reduction from current
levels by 2020--a pathetic 4% reduction from 1990 levels and nowhere
close to the aggressive action needed [12].
Japan, having both public opinion and its own
Environment Ministry on the right side of the issue, is
well-positioned to take decisive action, but they need the support of
global public opinion to win. Let's get them to immediately
declare what scientists have been saying for years now: that their
governments must enact mandatory, national caps on carbon emissions to
achieve a reduction of 25-40% from 1990 levels by 2020. Let's all
work together to help Mr. Fukuda, host to the most powerful and
polluting countries in the world, to put mandatory, national carbon
caps on the agenda at this meeting-- both for his country and for the
rest of the G8.
References
-
-
"Voluntary, then mandatory path for
CO2 scheme-Japan." Reuters,
October 5, 2007.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUKT14136220071005.
-
Arita, Eriko. "Are Japan's leaders
merely readers on climate change?." Japan Times, March 20, 2008.
http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/fe20080320a1.html.
-
Doniger, David D., Antonia V.
Herzog, and Daniel A. Lashof. "CLIMATE CHANGE: An Ambitious, Centrist
Approach to Global Warming Legislation." Science 314, no. 5800 (November 3, 2006):
764-765. doi:10.1126/science.1131558. http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/314/5800/764.
-
Hansen, J., M. Sato, P. Kharecha,
D. Beerling, V. Masson-Delmotte, M. Pagani, et al. "Target atmospheric
CO2: Where should humanity aim?." 0804.1126 (April 7, 2008).
http://arxiv.org/abs/0804.1126.
-
-
Wigley, T. M. L. "The Climate
Change Commitment." Science 307, no. 5716 (March 18, 2005):
1766-1769. doi:10.1126/science.1103934.
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/307/5716/1766.
-
-
-
-
Rivers, Nic, and Mark Jaccard. "
Canada's efforts towards greenhouse gas emission reduction: a case
study on the limits of voluntary action and subsidies." International Journal of Global Energy
Issues 23, no. 4: 307-23.
- Chris Fujioka, "Japan puts off interim C02 goal,"
Reuters, June 9, 2009, http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUST31826220080609?sp=true.