* Any views expressed in this opinion piece are those of the author and not of Thomson Reuters Foundation.
By Ambassador Marlene Moses
The outcome of the international climate change conference last year in Durban, South Africa, underscored a dichotomy that has come to characterise the effort to reduce the carbon dioxide emissions responsible for global warming: While it surpassed what many thought was politically feasible, it was far less than what is needed to avoid a catastrophe.
The “Durban Platform for Enhanced Action,” as the agreement is formally known, gave the talks a boost by setting the world on track to reach a comprehensive climate treaty in 2015. The catch, however, is that any new reduction commitments wouldn’t take effect until 2020 - not nearly soon enough to avoid widespread droughts, food shortages, rising seas, and other devastating climate impacts.
Perhaps this explains why even as some knowledgeable observers celebrated the meeting as an important breakthrough, others, equally familiar with the high-stakes negotiations, criticised it as a dangerous delay.
While the compromise may have been necessary to keep the talks from breaking down, the fact remains that unless concerted action is taken well before 2020, there is a good chance some island nations won’t make it to the end of the century.
The Durban Platform recognised the risks involved with postponement and even called on countries to submit proposals designed to bring emissions in line with scientific recommendations as soon as possible.
CLOSING THE GAP
In the vocabulary of climate science, carbon dioxide emissions are measured in gigatonnes, Gt for short. One gigatonne (a billion metric tons) is roughly equivalent to the annual emissions from 200 coal-fired power plants or about 200 million passenger vehicles, which gives you a sense of the scale of the challenge we face.
In 2010, total emissions worldwide exceeded 48 Gt and they are on track to hit 56 Gt in 2020. But the latest research shows that annual emissions must be kept below 44 Gt in 2020, and decline steeply thereafter to avoid warming of more than 2.0 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels.
This says nothing of keeping the global temperature well below the 1.5 degree Celsius mark needed to give us a realistic chance of avoiding a potentially devastating rise in sea level and other unthinkable calamities.
The Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), a coalition of 43 vulnerable island nations from around the world, has submitted a workplan to achieve urgent emissions cuts. The proposals, some of which are outlined below, are based on the latest economic and scientific research and can be accomplished quickly and affordably.
First, most of the emissions reduction pledges that countries affirmed in Durban date back to 2010 or earlier. But even if the countries succeed in achieving the high end of these cuts, which is far from certain, the emissions gap would only be reduced by half.
To that end, we are proposing a ministerial conference be held later this year. The discussion should explore options for a range of actions that can close the emissions gap with a view to ensuring the highest possible mitigation efforts by all parties.
QUICK AND AFFORDABLE CUTS
There is abundant new evidence that emissions can be reduced quickly and affordably. For example, studies have shown that the global economic downturn has made cutting carbon pollution considerably less expensive than previously estimated. In light of these savings, governments should increase their pledges accordingly.
Another way to slash emissions is simply to waste less energy. Study after study has shown that making automobiles, buildings, appliances, and energy grids operate more efficiently produces remarkable savings not only in emissions, but also money.
Furthermore, by raising the global energy mix from the current 10 percent renewable to 15 percent by 2020 we could cut carbon dioxide emissions by 4 Gt. An increase of 20 percent could close the emissions gap entirely.
We should also phase out the lavish production subsidies enjoyed by the fossil fuel industry. Not only is the misallocation of resources unfair, it delays innovations and investment in sustainable energy technology.
Finally, wealthy countries must provide developing countries with the financial resources, technology and capacity building necessary to increase their own energy efficiency and supply of renewables.
Such an investment is highly cost effective and builds energy independence in some of the fastest growing parts of the world. It is also the right thing to do. Developing countries have contributed the least to this crisis, but without these actions they will suffer the most from its impacts.
The sheer accessibility of these and other proposals to close the emissions gap calls attention to what has become another truism at the climate talks: the failure to act is not for want of technology or money, but political will.
This time, however, we no longer have the luxury of waiting until politics catch up with reality.
Ambassador Marlene Moses is the permanent representative to the United Nations for the Republic of Nauru and chair of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS).
