All posts in COP12

-by Sarah

Connie Hedegaard, Minister of Environment of Denmark, just made the most exciting speech I have heard here so far.

Perhaps it is my Danish pride surfacing, but this dynamic speaker not only hit the nail on the head by saying that, although we make progress at these meetings, COP is a frustrating process that is not enough, but enthusiastically announced DK’s bid to host COP15-COP/MOP5 in Copenhagen.

These conferences are not enough, Ms. Hedegaard said, and they are too slow. However, she expressed great hope in our ability to come together, and it seems Denmark is willing to take a leadership role. This is important, as the EU as a whole has been waffling in these negotiations and getting a lot of flack from environmentalists because of it.

But Ms. Hedegaard’s message is clear and exciting: “This is the window of opportunity, and we can seize it together.”

Yay Denmark!

-by Sarah

After lunch I walked by the World Meteorological Institute’s (WMO) booth and decided to try to get a better idea of how people actually monitor things like atmospheric temperature, sea surface temperature, weather, etc. and how that information is used.

After speaking to a WMO representative, I have gleaned the following info, which I think is interesting.

There are several satellites from which come a lot of the data that the WMO uses. These satellites have been around for approximately twenty years- not a hugely long time, highlighting that the science of climate is a relatively knew thing- at least in terms of advanced technology. (And technology will probably continue to change, so what we have now may become as outdated as measurements from regular old thermometers or people’s journal entries saying that a month was particularly hot or a flood happened). There are also several ground stations that are a part of, or at least contribute information to, the WMO’s Global Atmosphere Watch (GAW). A glance at the map of the distribution of these stations reveals that a very very high percentage of them are concentrated in the US and Europe, which says something not only about why developing countries have a harder time getting information (the woman I spoke to also pointed out the fact that a lot of computer power is needed to process the information and developing countries just don’t have that) but about how much truly global data there is. The information that is gathered and synthesized is used to predict weather and in early warning systems for natural disasters. However, the same gap between developed and developing countries applies to communications systems, which affects how useful early warnings are.

I asked the woman I spoke with how the WMO makes predictions when the earth is so dynamic and different factors in climate are always changing. She said that they look at historical data- at least 30 years back, she said- and use that in combination with current observations to see what has happened and make a prediction based on that. I asked how accurate that was, and she said about 75% of the WMO’s predictions actually come to fruition. This seems relatively high to me, and, as she pointed out, “it is enough to base a decision on, such as where to spend money.” I can see the logic in this; absolute certainty, it seems to me, is merely a concept and will never exist. But it’s useful enough in a country like Kenya, where drought has devastated much of the country, to have an early warning in order to be able to prepare and help its people. However, there are obstacles (such as getting an early warning, disseminating that information to citizens, and actually taking action to help people survive it) that depend on the capacity, infrastructure, and resources of a nation in the use of the information and carrying out of a plan.

This is an incomplete post salvaged from the internet archive.

-by Sarah

As I write, the opening of the joint high-level segments of COP12 and COP/MOP2 are taking place, in the form of statements by high-profilers such as Minister Kibwana of Kenya (the president of COP), Mortiz Leuenberger (the president of the Swiss confederation), President of Kenya Mwai Kibaki , and Kofi Annan. Minister Kibwana began the morning with a speech that specifically mentioned the hope that youth have given him in the past week and a half, and a call to “encourage rather than vilify non-Kyoto parties.” “However small or big,” he said, “we have to step back from the blame game and take responsibility.” In terms of reaching the goal of global participation, this strikes me as sound advice, although I think it is important to push the issue of responsibility and equity. Mr. Leuenberger was not so afraid to lay blame, saying that non-parties to Kyoto should reconsider if they do not want to be accused of causing disaster. Through a carbon tax, which would be based on the polluter pays principle and fund adaptation measures, Leuenberger asserted that the world would make a giant leap in mitigating and adapting to climate change. Perhaps he is right, and I am inclined to think the tax is fair. Mr. Annan cited several risks of a rapidly changing climate, from disease to destruction of ecosystems to loss of physical land to live on (with sea level rise) and resulting conflicts of migration and competition for resources. I am not sure I think we need to have all of the scientific information regarding the earth’s systems and potential human-induced feedbacks or effects. We will never be sure of anything; the best thing, in my opinion, is to take this opportunity to try something else. If we want to survive, we need to do what we can where we can with what we can to change, and in this effort I think we have the potential to come together. When we look at changing as an opportunity, and from the point of view of survival, those of us in the North can change our view from one of sacrifice. This seems to be to be a major difference between developing and developed countries