climateunitednations
UNEP official calls for ‘coherent planning’ as Aichi falters in Africa.
International agreements are increasingly looking at conserving forests as a way to mitigate global warming, preserve biodiversity and safeguard human communities from environmental disasters.
International agreements are increasingly looking at conserving forests as a way to mitigate global warming, preserve biodiversity and safeguard human communities from environmental disasters.
An assessment by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has found many forest-related Aichi Targets of the Convention of Biological Diversity will not achieve their goals at their current rates of progress.
Over the past few years, more forest-conservation goals have been adopted by UN member countries. But a UNEP official says this duplication of efforts may actually be derailing forest conservation.
He recommends a more streamlined approach focused on the Aichi Targets and Sustainable Development Goals.
Forests cover about 40 million square kilometers – around 30 percent – of the Earth’s surface. They provide habitat for countless species, as well as important ecosystem services for human communities. Tree roots prevent land degradation and desertification by stabilizing soils, and help maintain water and nutrient cycling in soils.
The UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) estimates that about 1.6 billion people depend on forests for employment, income generation and subsistence. The FAO warns that deforestation sparked by an ever-increasing demand for food, materials and fuel is degrading ecosystems and diminishing water availability.
Forests are also huge carbon sinks and, as such, feature prominently in international strategies to combat climate change. According to a report by the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), forests may be capable of absorbing approximately 10 percent of all global emissions by 2050.
Research indicates that, globally, an estimated 570 million hectares could be available for forest restoration. If restored, these areas could sequester about 440 billion metric tons of CO2.
Because of the ability of forests to sequester large amounts of carbon, forest restoration has become a critical part of the Paris Agreement. The multinational accord, signed by 195 countries in 2016, seeks to keep global temperatures from rising 2 degrees or more above a preindustrial baseline in the hopes of staving off the worst effects of climate change.
The Paris Accord wasn’t the first global effort by governments to tackle forest conservation. The 1992 Earth Summit, which gathered leaders from 105 nations in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, resulted in the adoption of the Rio Convention aimed at conserving biodiversity, mitigating global warming and combating desertification. Participating governments also agreed on a framework for sustainable development – but via forestry principles that weren’t legally binding.
Tony Simons, director general of the World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF), told Mongabay that despite harboring 90 percent of the world’s biodiversity, forests were largely left behind when the Rio Convention was devised and adopted in 1992.
“Forestry was a political battle: this saw it lag behind as the first three got a framework convention,” Simsons told Mongabay. “This was until the Bali Action in 2007 during COP13 [when] Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) was included in the Bali Action Plan as a component of curbing emissions.”
REDD is a U.N. policy mechanism first negotiated under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC) in 2005 to help developing countries reduce greenhouse gas emissions by providing financial incentives for keeping their forests in the ground. In 2010 it was expanded to include other conservation and management principles, and is now denoted as REDD+.
The Rio Convention, which includes the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCDD) and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC), acknowledge that forests are critical in achieving their respective goals.
Tim Christophersen, chief terrestrial ecosystems expert at the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) told Mongabay that the CBD later revised its forest biodiversity program, which contributed to subsequent global conservation agreements.
“This paved the way for the forest-related Aichi Targets (5, 7, 11 14 and 15), which are very ambitious and cover almost all aspects of sustainable forest management,” Christophersen said.
The Aichi Biodiversity targets are part of the 2011-2020 Strategic Plan for Biodiversity adopted during the tenth Conference of the Parties (COP10) in 2010 in Nagoya, Japan. There are 20 targets in all, which aim to achieve broad biodiversity safeguards by 2020. For instance, Target 5 seeks to halve the overall rate of habitat loss while significantly reducing degradation and fragmentation.
Progress in Africa – and lack thereof
Africa contains a significant portion of the world’s forest cover – including its second-largest rainforest. To see how Africa was faring in its progress towards the Aichi Biodiversity Targets, UNEP conducted a 2016 mid-term review.
Overall, UNEP found nine out of the 20 targets were progressing towards their goals, but at an “insufficient rate,” five showed no progress and three appear to be regressing further away from target goals. These three – Targets 4, 5 and 12 – pertain to sustainable production and consumption, habitat loss reduction and extinction prevention. The report indicates only two targets – 16 and 17 – which are concerned with international agreement ratification and action plan documentation are on track to achieve their goals. For one target – 14 – there was not enough data for UNEP to make an assessment.
One of the three targets UNEP assessed as regressing is Target 5, which aims to reduce habitat loss. The report indicates the continent lost between 0.2 percent and 2.57 percent of its forest cover every year from 2001 through 2013. Satellite data referenced in the report indicate deforestation accelerated in that period, with 2013 experiencing the most tree cover loss.
Professor Godwin Kowero, executive secretary of the African Forest Forum (AFF), told Mongabay that while some regions are seeing progress, Africa as a whole is not likely to achieve Target 5 as its forest loss has accelerated.
“The rate of forest loss globally has decreased in developed countries, and places like Latin America has seen an increase in forest cover, but the rate of deforestation is still a bother in developing countries, Kowero said. “Forest degradation is difficult to monitor, but we still have a long way to go in achieving the target.”
Africa’s deforestation drivers are many. Among the biggest, says Harrison Kojwang, an environment and natural resources consultant based in Namibia, are charcoal production, timber harvesting, agriculture expansion, mining, oil and gas exploration, and the curing of tobacco.
Target 15 is one of the five targets that show little to no progress, according to UNEP. This target aims to conserve and restore at least fifteen percent of degraded ecosystems by 2020, and one way Africa is exploring to meet this goal is through the African Forest Landscape Restoration Initiative (AFR100). AFR100 is a country-led program devised to restore 100 million hectares of land by 2030. The program’s restoration activities are supported through national development financing amounting to around $1 billion and $540 million in private sector funding.
AFR100 was launched during COP21 in Paris in 2015. So far, 21 African countries have committed at least 63.3 million hectares of land for forest landscape restoration.
However, there appears to have been some progress made towards other forest-related Aichi targets, such as Target 11. Focused on aquatic environments, Target 11 aims to see 10 percent of coastal and marine areas and 17 percent of terrestrial and inland water areas conserved by 2020. These areas include peatlands, coastal wetlands and mangrove forests.
Peatlands and mangroves are particularly high carbon-value ecosystems. A report by Wetlands Internationals referenced by UNCCD found 25 to 30 percent of the world’s terrestrial carbon is stored in peatlands, and that the decomposition of drained peatland generates 1.3 billion tons of C02 per year. A 2010 study published in Nature found mangrove degradation releases between 0.07 and 0.42 billion tons of CO2 annually.
In its progress report, UNEP notes that protected area coverage in Africa has steadily increased since 1990 and is making progress towards the terrestrial and marine coverage elements of Aichi Target 11. The report found 13.8 percent of terrestrial and inland aquatic environments and 3.7 percent of marine and coastal areas were included in protected areas in 2014.
Yet, despite that progress, UNEP considers progress towards Target 11 insufficient to meet its goal unless efforts are improved.
Dr. Martin Nganje, president of the Africa Section of the Society for Conservation Biology and a consultant at the African Forest Forum based in Cameroon, disagrees with this. He said that at its current rate of progress, Africa is likely to meet the requirements of Target 11.
“Reducing the rates of loss and degradation of these natural ecosystems offer cost-effective strategies that deliver immediate climate action,” Nganje told Mongabay.
Trans-boundary policies enacting wildlife monitoring activities outside protected areas are also beginning to create incentives for protection of forest and forest resources used as wildlife corridors by member states, according to Kojwang.
“Forest management is riding on the objectives of the wildlife protection,” he said. “Namibia and Botswana have a joint elephant monitoring policy that is benefiting forest protection within the corridors. Also, strong community-based conservancies within which these corridors existing in Southern Africa countries are resulting in better protection of forests.”
For one target – Target 14 – a lack of available data prevented UNEP from assessing its progress. This goal pertains to the safeguarding of ecosystem services, which are benefits conveyed to human communities by surrounding natural environments.
One ecosystem benefit is drought mitigation by forests. Trees help bind water in soil and shade the ground from drying sunlight; scientists also believe forests also aid cloud formation as stored water molecules pass from leaves into the air. Research indicates that this lends to more resilience from droughts, with models showing forests have evaporation rates that are 30 percent less than savannahs.
Over the past several years, drought has ravaged parts of Africa – particularly the eastern and southern parts of the continent – leading to widespread famine as agricultural yields plummeted. Experts say better land use and protection could help reduce damage from future droughts; UNEP notes farmer-managed agroforestry projects in several countries has led to greater resilience from drought, as well as bigger yields of corn and other crops.
Kojwang says that while there is a lack of data on overall progress towards Target 14’s ecosystem services protection goal, countries like Ethiopia, Côte d’Ivoire and Kenya are showing some headway through REDD+ projects that are collaborating with local communities. However, he said efforts are lacking in the conservation of water catchment areas outside national parks in several regions.
Too much of a good thing?
In September 2015, 193 UN member countries gathered in New York and adopted 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as part of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The SDGs are aimed at protecting the environment while addressing poverty, increasing economic growth and prosperity, and improving access to health, education, and social resources.
At the January 2017 UN Forum on Forests (UNFF), participating nations adopted the UN 2017-2030 Strategic Plan for . The plan includes a set of six Global Forest Goals (GFGs) and 26 associated targets. These goals intend to, among other things, increase forest area by 3 percent worldwide, enhance forest-based economic, social and environmental benefits, and increase both the area of protected forests and the proportion of forest products produced from sustainably managed forests.
The GFGs are also aimed at supporting the objectives of the International Arrangement on Forests and making progress towards the SGDs, the Aichi Biodiversity Targets, the Paris Agreement and other international forest-related commitments.
While having in place so many international agreements focused on conserving and restoring forest may sound like a good thing, UNEP’s Christophersen said it is leading to a duplication of efforts that may be negatively affecting forest protection.
“It is contributing to a lack of impact on forests as the projects are too small and fragmented,” he said. “We cannot afford it anymore after the adoption of the SDGs. It costs too much, but more importantly we need to send clear, coherent policy signals to governments and the private sector on forest policy, and this can only come from legally binding instruments, and by implementing the SDGs.”
Christophersen calls for streamlining international forest protection efforts and have countries adopt comprehensive land use plans that aim to restore forest landscape, mitigate climate change effects and conserve biodiversity
“All these efforts related to forest ecosystem and climate change, desertification and combating loss of biodiversity should be coherently planned and implemented under the SDG’s if forests are to be protected,” he said.
Christophersen thinks a merger between the UNFF and CBD forest-focused goals would be the best bet. Barring that, he suggests a slimming-down of UNFF priorities.
“If not [a merger], UNFF should at least only focus on monitoring the forest-related aspects of the SDG implementation, together with the CBD and other key players, and not engage in any other activities,” Christophersen said.
Mongabay reached out to UNFF for comment, but had received no response by press time.
Keep reading...Show less
U.N. chief hopes storms will sway climate skeptics like Trump.
United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres said on Wednesday he hoped recent devastating hurricanes in the Caribbean and southern United States would convince climate change skeptics like U.S. President Donald Trump that global warming is a “major threat.”
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres said on Wednesday he hoped recent devastating hurricanes in the Caribbean and southern United States would convince climate change skeptics like U.S. President Donald Trump that global warming is a “major threat.”
Guterres, who will visit the Caribbean islands of Antigua, Barbuda and Dominica this weekend to see damage from last month’s hurricanes Irma and Maria, said the world must be more determined in pushing for ”a clean, sustainable energy future.”“I have not yet lost my hope that what is happening will be making those that are still skeptical about climate change to be more and more realizing that this, indeed, is a major threat for the international community at the present moment,” he said.
Trump has several times called climate change a hoax and announced in June that the United States would withdraw for a landmark Paris climate deal, which seeks to limit planetary warming by curbing global emissions of carbon dioxide and other gases that scientists believe drive global warming.
Trump visited the U.S. territory of Puerto Rico on Tuesday to survey the damage from Hurricane Maria. He also visited the southern U.S. states of Texas and Louisiana in September in the wake of Hurricane Harvey and Florida after Hurricane Irma.
“It is rare to see so many storms of such strength so early in the season,” Guterres told reporters. “Scientific models have long predicted an increase in the number of Category 4 and 5 hurricanes. This is precisely what is happening – and even sooner than expected.”
The secretary-general said innovative financing mechanisms would be crucial in helping countries, such as those in the Caribbean, cope with such significant external shocks.
“I remember when Jordan and Lebanon were impacted by huge refugee inflows. They were finally entitled to receive concessional loans by the World Bank because of the fact that they had these huge external shocks,” Guterres said.
“I think we are facing a similar situation,” he said.
The United Nations and partners have so far sent to the Caribbean region: 18 tons of food; 3 million water purification tablets; 3,000 water tanks; 2,500 tents; 2,000 mosquito nets and school kits; 500 debit cards for cash assistance.
Guterres said an appeal has been launched for nearly $114 million to cover humanitarian needs, but that the response has been poor.
Reporting by Michelle Nichols; Editing by David Gregorio
Keep reading...Show less
China will meet 2020 carbon reduction target, Xie Zhenhua says.
China is on track to fulfill or possibly surpass its commitment of cutting its carbon intensity by 40 to 45 per cent from 2005 levels by 2020, the country’s chief negotiator at the Paris Agreement has said.
hina is on track to fulfil or possibly surpass its commitment of cutting its carbon intensity by 40 to 45 per cent from 2005 levels by 2020, the country’s chief negotiator at the Paris Agreement has said.
Xie Zhenhua said in Hong Kong on Tuesday that despite the United States’ planned withdrawal from the agreement, China’s commitment to fight climate change is unwavering.
China has already cut its carbon intensity – the amount of carbon emissions per unit of GDP growth – by 39 per cent this year while sustaining economic growth, said Xie, who is also former head of the State Environmental Protection Administration.
“There should be no problems meeting the 40 to 45 per cent target in 2020. (China) may even do better than that,” he said.
Xie was in Hong Kong to receive one of the three Lui Che Wo prizes for his efforts in tackling global warming. He will be donating the HK$20 million prize money to the Tsinghua University Education Foundation. He is the winner in the sustainability category.
Earlier this year, US President Donald Trump announced his decision to withdraw his government’s ratification of the international agreement to limit emissions of greenhouse gases. He said at the time that the agreement “is less about the climate and more about other nations gaining a financial advantage over the United States”.
Trump’s decision reversed a key pillar of former President Barack Obama’s effort to combat an increase in global temperatures, which scientists say has been hastened by the burning of coal, oil and other fossil fuels.
The move also cedes global climate action leadership to China.
Xie said that the US’s withdrawal would not harm China’s commitment to fight climate change. China’s position on the agreement has been very clear, he said, as President Xi Jinping has already made clear that the agreement did not come easily and so should not give up on it easily.
The chief negotiator also said that the US’s withdrawal would not harm other countries in fulfilling their commitments, saying that many countries have already stated they would adhere to the agreement.
On his thoughts about receiving the prize, Xie said it is more than a personal encouragement.
“It is not only a great encouragement to me,” he said.
“But also the recognition of our country’s long-term efforts and achievement of coordinating of both domestic and international dimensions, transiting from tackling the challenge of climate change to promoting the historic opportunity to achieve sustainable development and pushing the transition towards green low-carbon development.”
Awards in the other two categories – positive energy and welfare betterment – went respectively to the International Paralympic Committee (IPC) and Landesa, a non-governmental organisation based in the US that has helped to secure land rights for 120 million poor rural families in 50 countries since 1967.
Keep reading...Show less
Making an economic case for climate action.
Having faced a year of record temperatures and devastating hurricanes, the United States stands more to lose if it doesn’t take steps to reduce the risk and impact of climate change, according to a new report.
UNITED NATIONS, Oct 2 2017 (IPS) - Having faced a year of record temperatures and devastating hurricanes, the United States stands more to lose if it doesn’t take steps to reduce the risk and impact of climate change, according to a new report.
Launched by the Universal Ecological Fund, it details the costs of the U.S.’ climate inaction to the national economy and public health and urges for policies to move the country towards a sustainable future.
“It’s not about ideology, it’s about good business sense,” the former president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) and the report’s co-author James McCarthy told IPS.
“Many people say that they will not have the discussion because they are not convinced of the science—well then, let’s just look at the economics, let’s look at what it is costing to not have that discussion,” he continued.
A Wake of Destruction
The U.S. is still reeling from an unprecedented month of three hurricanes and 76 wildfires, devastating landscapes from Puerto Rico to Washington.
Hurricane Maria alone left Puerto Rican residents without food, water, or electricity. Approximately 44 percent of the population lacks clean drinking water and just 11 out of 69 hospitals have fuel or power, pushing the island to the brink of a humanitarian crisis.
“This year was nothing like we’ve seen,” said McCarthy.
Though aid delivery is underway, the economic losses from not only Hurricane Maria, but also Hurricanes Harvey and Irma along with the wildfires that swept through the Western coast, are estimated to be the costliest weather events in U.S. history.
The report estimates a price-tag of nearly 300 billion dollars in damage, representing 70 percent of the costs of all 92 weather events in the last decade.
Since hurricane season is yet to end, more expensive and damaging storms may still be in the forecast.
According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Centers for Environmental Information, the number of extreme weather events that incurred at least one billion dollars in economic losses and damages have increased in the last decade by almost two and a half times.
Such losses will only rise as human-induced climate change continues, contributing to dry conditions favorable for more wildfires and warm oceans which lead to more intense storms and higher sea levels.
McCarthy, who is also an Oceanography Professor at Harvard University, told IPS that investments beyond creating hurricane-proof infrastructure are needed to counter such damage.
“Infrastructure is important, but everything we can do to reduce the intensity of these events, by slowing the rate of global warming, will make future infrastructure more likely to be effective,” he said.
An Unhealthy Dependence
Among the major drivers of climate change is the burning of fossil fuels which the U.S. continues to rely on to produce energy.
Coal, oil and natural gas—all of which are fossil fuels— currently account for over 80 percent of the primary energy generated and used in the North American nation. When such fossil fuels are burned, large amounts of carbon dioxide (CO2) are released to the atmosphere, contributing to rapid changes in the climate.
Though emissions regulations have reduced air pollution health damages by 35 percent, or nearly 67 billion dollars per year, burning fossil fuels still produces health costs that average 240 billion dollars every year.
If fossil fuels continue to be used, both economic losses and health costs are estimated to reach at least 360 billion dollars annually, or 55 percent of U.S.’ growth, over the next decade.
And the government won’t be footing the expensive bill, the report notes.
“Time after time, we are going to see the public bearing the costs…it becomes a personal burden for them,” McCarthy told IPS.
He highlighted the importance of the U.S. taking steps to transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy.
“To move people, literally and figuratively, into the future to be more healthy and more sustainable and a less expensive way of doing business just makes sense,” McCarthy said.
Not only will it provide sustainable clean electricity and reduce the rate of global warming, renewable energy also can add to the economy by producing jobs.
Clean energy already employs almost 2 million workers, and doubling solar and wind generation can create another 500,000 jobs.
In order to successfully transition to a low-carbon economy, investments are essential, some of which can potentially come from taxing carbon emissions, the report states. A carbon tax aims to reduce emissions and promote a more efficient use of energy, including the transition to electric cars.
According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a tax on carbon emissions can potentially produce revenues of up to 200 billion dollars in the U.S. within the next decade.
The carbon tax has been a controversial policy, with some expressing concern that companies will simply shift the cost to the consumer by way of increasing the prices of gasoline and electricity.
However, McCarthy noted that the public already currently bears the burden in terms of damages from extreme weather events and unhealthy air expenses.
A Government Denial
Despite the evidence for climate change and the role of fossil fuels in driving such change, U.S. President Donald Trump has begun to unravel many essential environmental protections.
Not only did his administration announce the U.S. withdrawal from the landmark Paris Agreement, but it is currently working to dismantle the Clean Power Plan (CPP) which aims to reduce carbon pollution from power plants across the country.
The move is tied to President Trump’s repeated calls to renew investments in the coal industry, claiming that it will bring back jobs.
McCarthy said that these actions are not “borne out by the facts.”
“The notion that you will be able to return the U.S. to a coal economy—there is no evidence for that. And secondly, if you are going to create jobs, the sensible way to create them is in a forward-looking area such as renewable energy rather than the highly risky and repeated exposure of coal,” he told IPS.
In spite of a national strategy that may exacerbate climate change, McCarthy said that cities and states are taking the lead and will continue to move in the right direction regardless of bipartisan politics.
Iowa is the leading U.S. state in wind power with over 35 percent of its electricity generated from wind energy.
In Oklahoma, where U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt hails from, 25 percent of electricity comes from wind energy.
“When you look at a state like Iowa and see [their] electricity is coming from wind energy, it doesn’t say anything about the politics of Iowa—it says something about people being sensible about how they spend their money and what they invest in to get a particular product,” McCarthy said.
The U.S.’ reluctance to reduce greenhouse gas emissions not only impacts Americans, but also people around the world. Since the process of withdrawing from the Paris Agreement will take time, McCarthy expressed hope that the U.S. will change its course.
“We hope over that period of time that [President Trump] will see that this partnership has enormous value and not only what the U.S. is doing that affects the rest of the world but vice versa,” he said.
“We should find reason to join efforts with the community of nations that have recognized, much like what we try to say in this report, that if we don’t do something, these are going to be very expensive and, in some cases, life-threatening consequences of this sort of neglect,” McCarthy concluded.
The EPA is expected to release a revised version of the CPP in the coming weeks, and it is expected to be significantly weaker than the original.
Governments will be convening in Bonn, Germany for the UN’s Annual Climate Change Conference (COP23) in November to advance the implementation of the Paris Agreement. The focus will be on how to implement issues including emissions reductions, provision of finance, and technology.
Keep reading...Show less
Western governors take the lead on climate change.
New alliance highlights states’ progress despite President Donald Trump’s rollbacks.
The governors of California and Washington traveled to New York City last week to send a strong, simple message to world leaders gathered for the United Nation’s annual General Assembly. When it comes to acting on climate change, “you can count us in,” Washington Governor Jay Inslee said.
During its meetings with world leaders last week, the Trump administration reiterated the president’s plans to withdraw from the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement unless it can be renegotiated. Inslee and California Gov. Jerry Brown joined New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo in New York to counter President Donald Trump’s message and his aggressive efforts in recent months to rescind national policies designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
The three governors are co-chairs of the U.S. Climate Alliance, a group of 14 states plus Puerto Rico formed in June to coordinate and showcase state-level action. Oregon and Colorado are the other Western states in the group. “This is about controlling our own destiny,” Inslee said during a press conference Wednesday with the other governors. “There is nothing that Donald Trump can do to stop us in our states from advancing these policies.”
The three governors, all Democrats, also participated in a roundtable with environment ministers from around the world at the United Nations two day earlier. They hope that by highlighting individual states’ determination to keep acting on climate change, other countries will be less likely to follow Trump in rejecting the Paris Agreement. Because California has long been a leader in policies to address climate change and Brown has frequently attended international climate change meetings, world leaders are aware that it and other states have forged ahead with — and without — federal leadership.
“We are a political and economic force; and we will drive the change that will get us to the climate goals that we have to reach,” Brown said at the press conference. For instance, states have the authority to set policies to reduce emissions for power plants and other industrial facilities in their states and can coordinate with other states to reduce emissions. They can set incentives and requirements to increase the use of renewable fuels like solar and wind and phase out dirty fuels like coal. They also can cut pollution from cars through low-carbon fuel programs that require refineries to reduce emissions from gasoline and diesel and zero-emissions vehicle programs that require automakers to sell electric cars. But fuel economy standards — the strongest policy tool for limiting greenhouse gas emissions from cars — are set by the federal government. And, unlike the federal government, states can’t require other states to cut emissions.
In the future, states can also drive key advances in climate policy, such as developing a sophisticated electric grid to accommodate more renewable power and multi-state networks of recharging stations for electric vehicles.
To emphasize that their combined actions are making a difference, the governors released a report that shows collective greenhouse gas emissions of the 14 alliance states dropped 15 percent between 2005 and 2015. And with policies already adopted in their states, they are projected to cut emissions 24 to 29 percent below 2005 levels by 2025.
The governors haven’t announced new joint initiatives yet, but they plan to do so in Bonn, Germany in November during the next UN climate change conference, according to staffers. Inslee and Brown both plan to attend. Because climate change is a global problem, international and federal action is most important. But by rejecting so many climate change policies, Trump has elevated the significance of state leadership. “Subnational action is now more important than it’s ever been,” says Robert Stavins, a professor of energy and economic development at Harvard University. “But saying that (state actions) are important, is not the same thing as saying that they are an adequate substitute for what would happen with federal policy.”
While the governors tried to present a unified front, the level of commitment to climate action varies significantly among states in the alliance.
California has committed to get 50 percent of its electricity from renewable sources by 2030, and, through its cap-and-trade program, to cut greenhouse gas emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2040.
Colorado was the first state to control emissions of methane, a potent greenhouse gas, from oil and gas production. But even as Gov. John Hickenlooper joined the alliance, he signed an executive order that encourages voluntary rather than mandatory actions. For instance, he said at the time: “We are instructing state agencies to work strategically with electric utilities and cooperatives who want to create plans to invest in as much renewable energy as possible.”
Oregon barred its large investor-owned utilities from providing electricity generated with coal as of 2030. And it requires they supply 50 percent of their electricity from renewables by 2040.
Washington state in 2016 capped greenhouse gas emissions for its largest industrial polluters. Inslee used regulation to limit climate pollution after the state legislature repeatedly rebuffed his efforts to pass legislation.
Montana has not joined the alliance, but Gov. Steve Bullock reacted strongly to Trump’s decision to pull out of the Paris accord: “Ask any Montana farmer, rancher, hunter, angler, or skier — climate change is real and poses a threat to our economy and way of life. To not acknowledge that or deal with it in a responsible way is short-sighted and dangerous,” he wrote on Facebook.
Nevada also has not joined, but its state legislature in June adopted climate-friendly policies, including a bill intended to revive the state’s residential solar industry. The legislature also passed a bill to increase the renewable portfolio standard but Gov. Brian Sandoval, a Republican, vetoed it.
All these state-level actions matter much more since Trump abandoned the U.S. role of leading by example and shepherding other nations’ responses to climate change. Sen. John Kerry, who as President Barack Obama’s secretary of state helped lead the nations of the world to coalesce around the Paris Agreement, lauded the states’ efforts. “Trump forfeited American leadership,” Kerry said at the press conference with the governors. “The leadership of governors and the leadership of corporations coming together is what is going to really save us here.”
Correspondent Elizabeth Shogren writes High Country News’ DC Dispatches from Washington.
Follow @shogrenE
Keep reading...Show less
Without federal help, local efforts add up in the climate fight.
According to two reports, states, cities, and businesses are on track to meet half the U.S. pledge to reduce carbon emissions under the Paris Agreement.
Climate
Without Federal Help, Local Efforts Add Up in the Climate Fight
According to two reports, states, cities, and businesses are on track to meet half the U.S. pledge to reduce carbon emissions under the Paris Agreement.
By Alex Furuya
September 21, 2017
Popular Stories
How to Tell a Raven From a Crow
See the Millions of Places Migrating Birds Have Gone—in One Gif
Learn to Identify Five Owls by Their Calls
On the Ground with Audubon Texas After Hurricane Harvey
Three Basic Ways to Identify Hawks, Eagles, Falcons, and Other Raptors
Scientists are concerned that climate change might cause migrating birds, like the Northern Parula, to arrive before or after food is available in the spring. Photo: Darla J. Oathout/Audubon Photography Awards
Birds Tell Us That We Need To Act On Climate
Pledge to stand with Audubon as we call on the new administration to listen to science and work toward climate solutions.
Sign the Pledge
Environmentalists from around the world were collectively dismayed on June 1, 2017 when President Donald Trump stood in the White House Rose Garden and announced that he’d withdraw the U.S. from the Paris Agreement.
This was expected. On the campaign trail he promised supporters that he’d exit the accord—the global collaborative effort to keep the planet’s temperature rise below 2°C—if elected president. And several months earlier, he’d ordered EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt to dismantle the Clean Power Plan, the policy central to meeting the U.S.’s Paris Agreement pledge to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 26 to 28 percent that of 2005 levels by 2025.
Within days, more than 1,000 U.S. mayors, governors, business leaders, and college presidents signed an open letter to the international community, promising to “[work] together to take forceful action and to ensure that the U.S. remains a global leader in reducing emissions.” The number of signatories has since topped 2,300. In addition, 14 states and Puerto Rico formed the U.S. Climate Alliance, a bi-partisan coalition that aims to meet the goals of Paris Agreement through coordinated state action.
Local actions like these will compose the U.S. climate fight for the foreseeable future, although it isn't clear whether they'll be able to fill the void left by the federal government. But according to two reports published this week, they could meet half or more of the U.S. climate pledge from the Paris Agreement by 2025.
In a report released on Sept. 13, researchers from the thinktank NewClimate Institute and the non-profit The Climate Group analyzed carbon-reduction commitments from 22 states, 54 cities, and 250 U.S. companies, and projected that, if these groups follow through, U.S. carbon emissions in 2025 will be 12 to 14 percent lower than the 2005 level. States provided more than two-thirds of the emissions reductions; companies (except for electric utilities) were also big contributors, many of which committed to significantly reduce emissions by converting to renewable energy.
The U.S. Climate Alliance released a report yesterday which included an independent analysis from the advisory firm Rhodium Group. It concluded that large states such as California, which recently passed a 10-year extension on its cap-and-trade program, New York, and Colorado were leading the country's emission reduction. It also found that states didn't have to make economic sacrifices to pursue climate action plans; in fact, the economies of states within in the U.S. Climate Alliance grew faster than those in the rest of the country, according to the report.
These studies provide hope for environmentalists in otherwise tough times, when the head of the EPA refuses to accept the science of climate change and President Trump’s proposed budget includes massive cuts to conservation programs. “It shows us that climate action is not solely dependent on the actions of national government,” says Helen Clarkson, CEO of The Climate Group, which published the report. “U.S. states, cities, and businesses have the power to mitigate the consequences of the Paris pullout.”
The movement provides hope for birds, too. More than 300 species of U.S. birds are impacted by climate change, which can cause myriad problems, according to Steven Beissinger, a conservation biologist at the University of California, Berkeley. Earlier springs can result in irregular bird nesting and feeding, warmer temperatures can reshape geographic ranges, and unpredictable weather can destabilize ecosystems, he says.
Reducing greenhouse gas emissions is essential to protect vulnerable birds such as the Black-billed Magpie and the Blue-winged Warbler. And this study shows that anyone can join the international movement to fight global warming—even without help from the federal government.
***
Audubon's Climate Initiative works to ensure that birds survive far into the future. To support our work, please make a donation today.
Keep reading...Show less
United Nations
Trump increasingly isolated as Nicaragua to sign Paris Agreement.
President Daniel Ortega has announced Nicaragua will sign the Paris climate agreement, leaving Donald Trump and Syria's Bashar Assad heads of the only two countries not taking part in the global accord.
Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega has announced that his country will sign the Paris Agreement, leaving only two countries out of the global effort to tackle climate change - the United States and Syria.
"When the only country left in the world that hasn't signed the Paris Agreement is Syria, President Trump's decision to withdraw from the accord stands out like a sore thumb," said David Waskow, international climate director at the World Resources Institute (WRI). "The Trump Administration's reputation as a climate loner deepens even farther."
Unlike the US, Nicaragua had refused to sign the agreement on grounds that it didn't go far enough to tackle climate change. The small Central American country wanted to see bigger emissions cuts from the wealthy, industrialized nations responsible for the bulk of the carbon in our atmosphere.
But earlier this week, Ortega told Nicaraguan state media that his country would soon sign the Paris Agreement, in solidarity with vulnerable countries in Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean that had already done so.
"We have to be in solidarity with this large number of countries that are the first victims, who are already the victims, and are the ones who will continue to suffer the impact of these disasters," Ortega said, according to Nicaraguan media.
Could the US renegotiate terms?
During his election campaign, Trump pledged to pull the US out of the international agreement. He formally announced that the country would withdraw in June, citing the "draconian financial and economic burdens the agreement imposes on our country."
During a climate change meeting between environment ministers in Montreal earlier this week, US officials reportedly said the US would consider rejoining the agreement, but the Trump administration denied any shift in stance.
"There has been no change in the United States' position on the Paris agreement," the White House said in a statement. "As the President has made abundantly clear, the United States is withdrawing unless we can re-enter on terms that are more favorable to our country."
Andrew Light, senior fellow at the WRI Global Climate Program, told DW there was some confusion over the US position over the weekend, but the Trump administration had been fairly consistent since July that it would be willing to "re-engage" in the Paris Agreement - meaning to revise its pledge.
The US lowering its commitment to cut carbon emissions might not be popular with other signatories, but Light says legal assessments suggest it would be permitted under the terms of the agreement.
"I don't think that any country would welcome any other party revising downward their target, but given that the targets themselves are not legally binding I don't believe there would be any legal recourse that they could make in response to that," Light told DW.
Trump against the world
Speaking at the Montreal event on the sidelines of the general assembly, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres warned that the Paris Agreement's current pledges would not be enough to reach its goal of keeping the global temperature rise well below 2 degrees.
By 2020, he said, "we need to make sure that we have substantially raised the bar of ambition."
World leaders including the UK's Theresa May, Chile's Michelle Bachelet, and South Africa's Jacob Zuma, underlined the importance of climate action and the Paris Agreement in speeches at the UN General Assembly this week.
Light says the US position is of concern to some countries, not only for its impact on emissions but also because of implications for climate security and development aid.
"We're doing so much climate-related development assistance around the world, if the administration were to apply some sort of climate litmus test to that assistance... countries are worried," Light said.
"I think this will impact their relationship with the United States because they do see climate change as a threat, regardless of what the US administration thinks, and they are relying on that assistance."
He added that Nicaragua may have decided to sign up to the agreement to avoid being placed in the same camp as Trump.
"I expect that they were weary of being called out as a hold-out on this along side the Trump administration and they didn't want to stand on that side of the line on the issue," Light said.
Keep reading...Show less
ORIGINAL REPORTING
MOST POPULAR
CLIMATE
