Å®ÉúСÊÓƵ

Å®ÉúСÊÓƵs at the World Climate Conference in Geneva have warned the
world’s politicians in the strongest terms not to underestimate the dangers
of global warming and to take immediate action to cut emissions of greenhouse
gases. The scientists’ recommendations were handed this week to a meeting
of ministers from 130 countries – but the minister seem unlikely to agree
on the need for action.

The scientific sessions of the Second World Climate Conference reinforced
the conclusions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (see ‘The
politics of climate: a long haul ahead’, New Å®ÉúСÊÓƵ, 27 October). They
went on to force agreements on the implications of warming for water resources,
forests, food supply, oceans and economic development. The scientists concluded
that ‘nations should now take steps towards reducing sources and increasing
sinks of greenhouse gases’.

The conference advised that cutting emissions ‘one to two per cent per
year starting now’ would ‘stabilise atmospheric CO₂ concentrations
by the middle of the 21st century at about 50 per cent above pre-industrial
concentrations’. This would come close to meeting the IPCC recommendation
that emissions of carbon dioxide must be cut by 60 per cent to stabilise
the concentration of the gas in the atmosphere, while offering politicians
a less daunting target to aim for.

Reinforcing the IPCC’s conclusions, the scientists stated that ‘technically
feasible and cost-effective opportunities exist to reduce CO₂
emissions in all countries’, such that many industrialised countries could
cut emissions from burning fossil fuels ‘by at least 20 per cent by 2005’.

Negotiators for the ministerial meeting were less sanguine. The US in
particular will be hard to convince. Delegates from Pacific island nations
who met in Honolulu last week said in Geneva that, when faced with a quote
from the IPCC report about the likelihood of climate change, President Bush
replied: ‘That’s not what my scientists are telling me.’ A senior American
scientist on the IPCC called this response ‘worrying’.

During attempts this week to draft a statement on climate for ministers
to approve the US, Canada, Saudi Arabia and the Soviet Union joined to block
the proposed target of a 20 per cent reduction in CO₂ emissions
by 2005. Instead, they called for stabilisation to apply to all greenhouse
gases, including CFCs, which are in any case due to be banned under the
treaty to protect the ozone layer.

CFCs contribute so much warming that, if they are included in the target
for stabilisation, the US would be able to stabilise its overall greenhouse
emissions even if it increases its output of carbon dioxide, as projected,
by 15 per cent. The EC insisted that CFCs should not be included in such
a target. The delegates agreed instead to aim only for ‘significant’ limitations
on emissions of greenhouse gases.

Alden Meyer, of the Union of Concerned Å®ÉúСÊÓƵs, says that this will
allow the US to continue business as usual. Charles Caccia, a member of
the Canadian parliament, who took part in the negotiations said: ‘This is
a no-numbers statement. No targets, no per cent reductions, no baseline
year (from which to calculate reductions).’