Who's Online

We have 291 guests online

Popular

3389 readings
COP21: A LACK OF GLOBAL VISION AND FULL OF SYSTEMIC CONSTRAINTS PDF Print E-mail
Earth News
Posted by Joan Russow
Saturday, 30 January 2016 13:15

by Joan Russow, Phd

Global Compliance Research Project

 

alt

the mocking by civil socirty of the fossil fuel states  drawing red lines 

 
The Secretary General, Ban Ki-Moon, urged the States to negotiate with a global vision, not a with a specific national vision
 
A global vision would be the following:

i.to address article 2 of the UNFCCC, the objective of the legally binding UNFCC;

stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system

ii.to collectively commit to a baseline, percentage and target  that would contribute rise in temperature waybelow 1.5 degrees

iii. to immediately end all subsidies for fossil fuel,

iv. to calculate the carbon budget for all states,

v. to divest in fossil fuels and to reinvest in renewable energy, to conserve sinks -such as old growth forests and bogs,

vi. to strengthen conservation of biodiversity, 

vii. to avoid all false solutions such as nuclear, geo-engineering and biofuels which would all violate principles within the UNFCCC,

viii. to compensate for historical emissions, and

ix to institute a fair and just transition for workers affected negatively by the new vision. 

x to promote nature-based solutions and socially equitable and environmentally sound such as solar, wind, tidal, wave and geothermal

 
  In the COP21 Preamble was the following:
“climate change represents an urgent and potentially irreversible threat to human society and the planet”
yet was there ‘a global vision and was the urgency addressed in COP 21?
There were systemic constraints preventing the addressing of the global urgency of climate change:
 
1. The two degree fallacy - "At 2 degrees the poor the disenfranchised and the vulnerable would not survive, at 1.5, they might" (COP15, IPCC Press Conference)
 2.   Some states are more equal than others, and that the forests that are left are to offset our emissions
 3. Expedient omission; global carbon budget. historical and per capita emissions, exempted military emissions, fossil fuel subsidies, extended negative investment absence of negative screens with false solutions such as nuclear, biofuel, geo- engineering  or genetic engineering
 4. The shortness of institutional memory and the undermining of legal obligations from articles 2 3 and 4 of the 1992 legally binding UNFCCC… or the shifting baseline syndrome;
 5. Non-binding “contributions” with wandering base dates, percentages and targets
 6. A solution should never be equally bad or worse than the problem it is intended to solve
 7. The lowest common denominator; the tyranny of consensus
 8.  The best is the enemy of the good the compromisers credo
 
FIRST SYSTEMIC CONSTRAINT
THE BEST IS THE ENEMY OF THE GOOD
 
Al states should have acted to fulfill SDG 13 and on Ban Ki Moon's call for negotiating with a global vision
 
In SDG13 on climate change, addressing climate change is described as urgent; climate change could jeopardize the fulfillment of most of the SDGs. and the key biodiversity areas.
 
In 1988, at the Changing Atmosphere Conference in Toronto, the participants including representatives from government, academia, NGO and industry expressed their concern about Climate Change in the Conference statement:
 
“Humanity is conducting an unintended, uncontrolled, globally pervasive experiment whose ultimate consequence could be second only to a global nuclear war. The Earth’s atmosphere is being changed at an unprecedented rate by pollutants resulting from human activities, inefficient and wasteful fossil fuel use ... These changes represent a major threat to international security and are already having harmful consequences over many parts of the globe.... it is imperative to act now.
 
The Conference called for immediate action by governments,
 
 To Reduce CO2 emissions by approximately 20% of 1988 levels by the year 2005 as an initial global goal. Clearly the industrialized nations have a responsibility to lead the way both through their national energy policies and their bilateral multilateral assistance arrangement.
 
Ban Ki Moon, in Paris, urged states to negotiate with a global vision not with national vested interests (COP 21 press conference)
 
A global vision  would be to address Article 2 and at a minimum to immediately end all subsidies for fossil fuel, to calculate the carbon budget for each state, to divest in fossil fuels and to reinvest in renewable energy, to conserve sinks -such as old growth forests and bogs (not  just as a means to offset emissions), to strengthen conservation of  biodiversity, to avoid all false solutions such as nuclear, geo-engineering and biofuels which would all violate principles within the UNFCCC, promote nature-based solutions along with solar energy, wind energy, wave and geothermal and to compensate for historical  emissions, and to institute a fair and just transition for workers affected negatively by the new vision.
 
In 2015 the global community is in danger of non-compliance with the purpose of the legally binding United Nations Framework on Climate Change (Article 2)
 Stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenicinterference with the climate system. Such a level should be achieved within a time-frame sufficient to allow ecosystemsto adapt naturally to climate change, to ensure that food production is not threatened and to enable economicdevelopment to proceed in a sustainable manner
 
AT COP21 BAN KI-MOON URGED STATES TO NEGOTIATE WITH A GLOBAL VISION NOT FROM SPECIFIC NATIONAL INTERESTS”
 
What cop21 should have been was a new global vision with legally binding actions to finally implement the binding commitments and adhere to the principles  in the legally binding 1992 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change UNFCCC
 
All the way through the negotiations, governments were talking about their red lines: i.e. we will not agree to a document if x is in the text or if x is not in the text.
There must be no compromise to accommodate the FOSSIL FUEL governments; instead there must be a strong legally binding document  that could be used to sue the US and other non-cooperating fossil fuel states for violation of article 2 of the legally binding UNFCCC 
 
 Stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. Such a level should be achieved within a time-frame sufficient to allow ecosystemsto adapt naturally to climate change, to ensure that food production is not threatened and to enable economic development to proceed in a sustainable manner.
 
 
At cop21 ban Ki-Moon urged states to negotiate with a global vision not from specific national interests” what cop21 should have been was a new global vision with legally binding actions to finally implement the binding commitments and adhere to the principles in the legally binding 1992 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change UNFCCC
All the way through the negotiations, governments were talking about their red lines: i.e. we will not agree to a document if x is in the text or if x is not in the text.
 There must be no compromise instead there must be a strong legally binding document that could be used to sue the USA and other non-cooperating fossil fuel states for violation of article 2 of the legally binding UNFCCC. 
 
SECOND SYSTEMIC CONSTRAINT
BASELINES TARGETS TIMEFRAMES WERE ALL OUT OF SYNC
 
 
 
At COP21 the proposed "contributions were not legally binding commitments and they ranged in baselines from1990 to 2010, from percentages from 20- 30+ % and targets from 2020 to 2030. 
 
A global vision would have been given that the states had failed to return to 1990 levels by the end of the century and given the urgency and the lost time. the real commitments would be time lines and targets in line with existing and emerging science such as 15% below 1990 by 2016, 20% below 1990 by 2017, 30% below 1990 levels by 2018, 50% below 1990 levels by 2020, 65 % below 1990 levels by 2025, 75% below 1990 levels by 2040 and 100% below 1990 emissions by 2050, decarbonization with 100% ecologically sound renewable energy,  
 
THIRD SYSTEMIC CONSTRAINT
EXPEDIENT OMISSION CARBON BUDGET ETC
 
Apart from long list of what they are going to do without being compelled to do anything. There were several expedient omissions in the final document: first there was no mention of fossil fuels- including oil, coal or gas, historical or per capita emissions and above all there was no mention of the carbon budget and fair shares of the carbon budget. At the press conference the he total carbon budget was a big issue with scientists and NGOs 
Total carbon budget is estimated at 2900 Gigatons from pre-industrial time in order to keep below 2 degrees, and that in 2011 1900 Gigatons of CO2 had been used up thus about 1000 Gigatons remains. 
 
AT THE CURRENT RATE OF 35.7 GT PER YEAR, IN 2015 THERE WOULD ONLY REMAIN AROUND 860 GT
 
IPCC – estimates the total remaining emissions from 2014/2015 to keep global average temperature below 2°C (900/ 860GTCO2) will be used in around 20 years at current emission rates
http://www.globalcarbonproject.org/carbonbudget/15/files/GCP_budget_2015_v1.pdf
The emission pledges from the US, EU, China, and India leave little room for other countries to emit in a 2°c emission budget (66% chance) of the 35 Giga tons.
 
UNEP indicated that in 2045 all the global carbon budget would be used up if the current annual rate continues of 35.7-40 Giga tons the budget not be used up more likely by 2037will be used up in 20 years 2-degree scenario will be used up in 6 years 1.5 degrees
This Indication is frightening and equally frightening is that this calculation was ignored in the agreement.
 
THIS EVIDENCE IS SIGNIFICANT FOR TO STRESS THE URGENCY OF HAVING LEGALLY BINDING INTERNATIONALLY DETERMINED MITIGATION COMMITMENTS.
3 Accepting the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) scenarios provide us with a global carbon budget that will be consumed in 10–20 years at current emissions levels, 4 and entail very significant levels of risk.
 
FOURTH SYSTEMIC CONSTRAINT;
THE SHORTNESS OF INSTITUTIONAL MEMORY
 
 
 
 
 
AND THE UNDERMINING OF LEGAL OBLIGATIONS FROM ARTICLE 2 3 AND 4 of UNFCCC
 
COP21 SUFFERED FROM THE SHIFTING BASELINE SYNDROME; SHORTNESS OF INSTITUTIONAL MEMORY
 
 A global vision is not just recalling (as was done in cop21) but abiding by articles 2 3 and 4 in the legally binding Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)
 
OBJECTIVE ARTICLE 2
 
Cop21 needed to advocate stronger actions than were proposed in thence was in 1992.
 
UNFCCC PREAMBLE; HISTORIC EMISSIONS is the following:
Noting that the largest share of historical and current global emissions of greenhouse gases has originated in developed countries, that per capita emissions in developing countries
are still relatively low and that the share of global emissions originating in developing countries will grow to meet their social and development needs,
IN COP21
REFERENCES TO HISTORICAL EMISSIONS 0
PER CAPITA 0
Decarbonization by 2050 in early versions COP 21 now
parties, and to undertake rapid reductions thereafter in accordance with best available science, so as to achieve a balance between anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of
greenhouse gases in the second half of this century, on the basis of equity, and in the context of sustainable development and efforts to eradicate poverty
 
COP21 SUFFERED FROM THE SHIFTING BASELINE SYNDROME
Ban Ki-Moon urged negotiators to negotiate with a global vision;
 
A global vision is not just recalling (as was done in cop21) but abiding by articles 2 3 and 4 in the legally binding UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)
 
UNFCCC OBJECTIVE ARTICLE 2
 
What the conference of the parties may adopt is to achieve, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the convention, stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. Such a level should be achieved within a time-frame sufficient to allow ecosystems to adapt naturally to climate change, to ensure that food production is not threatened and to enable economic development to proceed in a sustainable manner.
 
COP21
holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2 °c above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °c above pre-industrial levels, recognizing that this would significantly reduce the risks and impacts of climate change;
 but at 1 degree rise in temperature there is already de-stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that is causing dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.
Stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic Interference with the climate system.
A global vision would be to address article 2 would be at a minimum to immediately end all subsidies for fossil fuel, to calculate the
carbon budget for each state, to enforce fair share of the carbon budget, to divest in fossil fuels and to reinvest in renewable energy,
to commit to decarbonisation by 2050, to conserve sinks (not just as a means to offset emissions), to avoid all false solutions such as nuclear, geo-engineering and biofuels which would all violate principles within the UNFCCC and to compensate for historical emissions.
 
UNFCCC ARTICLE 3 PRINCIPLES
 In their actions to achieve the objective of the convention and to implement its provisions, the parties shall be guided, inter alia, by the following:
 . UNFCCC 
3.1. The parties should protect the climate system for the benefit of present and future generations of humankind, on the basis of equity and in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities. Accordingly, the developed country parties should take the lead in combating climate change and the adverse effects thereof.
. UNFCCC
 
A GLOBAL VISION WOULD HAVE BEEN TO REPECT THE COMMITMENTS UNDER ARTICLE 4 IN UNFCCC
 
UNFCCC ARTICLE 4 COMMITMENTS
 
1. All parties, taking into account their common but differentiated responsibilities and their specific national
and regional development priorities, objectives and circumstances, shall:
 (a) Develop, periodically update, publish and make available to the conference of the parties,
in accordance with article 12, national inventories of anthropogenic emissions by sources and
removals by sinks of all greenhouse gases not controlled by the Montreal protocol, using comparable
methodologies to be agreed upon by the conference of the parties;
 (b) Formulate, implement, publish and regularly update national and, where appropriate, regional
programmes containing measures to mitigate climate change by addressing anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of all greenhouse gases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol, and measures to facilitate adequate adaptation to climate change; of technologies, practices and processes that control, reduce or prevent anthropogenic emissions
of greenhouse gases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol in all relevant sectors, including the energy,
transport, industry, agriculture, forestry and waste management sectors;
(d) Promote sustainable management, and promote and cooperate in the conservation and enhancement,
as appropriate, of sinks and reservoirs of all 11 greenhouse gases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol,
including biomass, forests and oceans as well as other terrestrial, coastal and marine ecosystems;
 (e) Cooperate in preparing for adaptation to the impacts of climate change; develop and elaborate
appropriate and integrated plans for coastal zone management, water resources and agriculture,
and for the protection and rehabilitation of areas, particularly in Africa, affected by drought
and desertification, as well as floods;
(f) Take climate change considerations into account, to the extent feasible, in their relevant
social, economic and environmental policies and actions, and employ appropriate methods, for example
impact assessments, formulated and determined nationally, with a view to minimizing adverse effects
on the economy, on public health and on the quality of the environment, of projects or measures
undertaken by them to mitigate or adapt to climate change;
(g) Promote and cooperate in scientific, technological, technical, socio-economic and other research,
systematic observation and development of data archives related to the climate system and intended
to further the understanding and to reduce or eliminate the remaining uncertainties regarding
the causes, effects, magnitude and timing of climate change and the economic and social consequences of
various response strategies;
(h) Promote and cooperate in the full, open and prompt exchange of relevant scientific, technological,
technical, socio-economic and legal information related to the climate system and climate change, and
to the economic and social consequences of various response strategies;
 (I) Promote and cooperate in education, training and public awareness related to climate change and
encourage the widest participation in this process, including that of non-governmental organizations; and
 (j) Communicate to the conference of the party’s information related to implementation, in accordance with article 12.
 
UNFCCC ARTICLE 4 2. The developed country parties and other parties included in annex I commit themselves specifically as provided for in the following: 12
 UNFCCC 4.2(a) Each of these parties shall adopt national policies and take corresponding measures on
The mitigation of climate change, by limiting its anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases and protecting and enhancing its greenhouse gas sinks and reservoirs. These policies and measures will demonstrate
that developed countries are taking the lead in modifying longer-term trends in anthropogenic emissions consistent with the objective of the convention, recognizing that the return by the end of the present decade to earlier levels of anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol would contribute to such modification, and taking into account the differences in these parties' starting points and approaches, economic structures and resource bases,
the need to maintain strong and sustainable economic growth, available technologies and another individual
circumstances, as well as the need for equitable and appropriate contributions by each of these parties tithe global effort regarding that objective. these parties may implement such policies and measures jointly with other parties and may assist other parties in contributing to the achievement of the objective of the convention and, in particular, that of this subparagraph;
 
UNFCCC 4.2 (B) In order to promote progress to this end, each of these parties shall communicate,
within six months of the entry into force of the Convention for it and periodically thereafter, and
in accordance with article 12, detailed information on its policies and measures referred to in subparagraph
(a) above, as well as on its resulting projected anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals
by sinks of greenhouse gases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol for the period referred to
In subparagraph (a), with the aim of returning individually or jointly to their 1990 levels
These anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases not controlled
By the Montreal Protocol. this information will be reviewed by the conference of the parties, at its first session and periodically thereafter, in accordance with article 7;
 
 In 1990 average CO2 levels (concentrations) in the atmosphere were 320 ppm, that the global rise
in temperature from 1850-1990 was 0.78 degrees c and that the annual emissions of co2 in 1990 and
2015 were 22 and 39 Gigatons respectively
 
note in 1992 there was no discussion about offsets etc. 
              
 so, if offsets etc. what percentage reduction below 1990 levels would the contributions have to be to reverse the temperature to .78 C
 
UNFCCC 4.2 (C) calculations of emissions by sources and removals by sinks of greenhouse gases for the purposes of subparagraph
(b) above should take into account the best available scientific knowledge, including of the effective capacity of sinks and the respective contributions of such gases to climate change. The conference of the parties shall consider and agree
This includes policies and measures adopted by regional economic integration organizations on methodologies and calculations at its first session and review them regularly thereafter;
 
UNFCCC 4.2 (d) The conference of the parties shall, at its first session, review the adequacy of subparagraphs(a) and (b) above. Such review shall be carried out in the light of the best available scientific information and
assessment on climate change and its impacts, as well as relevant technical, social and economic information.
Based on this review, the conference of the parties shall take appropriate action, which may include the adoption
of amendments to the commitments in subparagraphs (a) and (b) above. the conference of the parties, at its
First Session, shall also take decisions regarding criteria for joint implementation as indicated in paragraph (a) above. a second review of subparagraphs (a) and (b) shall take place not later than 31
December 1998, and thereafter at regular intervals determined by the conference of the parties, until
the objective of the convention is met;
 
UNFCCC 4.2 (e) Each of these parties shall: (I) coordinate as appropriate with other such parties, relevant economic and administrative instruments developed to achieve the objective of the convention; and
(ii) Identify and periodically review its own policies and practices which encourage activities that lead to
greater levels of anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol
Than would otherwise occur:
 
UNFCCC 4.2(f) the conference of the parties shall review, not later than 31 December 1998, available information
with a view to taking decisions regarding such amendments to the lists in annexes I and ii as may be appropriate, with the approval of the party concerned;
 
UNFCCC 4.2 (g) Any party not included in annex I may, in its instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession, or at any time thereafter, notify the depositary that it intends to be bound by subparagraphs (a) and (b) above. The depositary shall inform the other signatories and parties of any such notification.
 
UNFCCC 4.3. The developed country parties and other developed parties included in annex ii shall provide new and additional financial resources to meet the agreed full costs incurred by developing country parties in complying
with their obligations under article 12, paragraph 1. They shall also provide such financial resources, including
for the transfer of technology, needed by the developing country parties to meet the agreed full incremental
costs of implementing measures that are covered by paragraph 1 of this article and that are agreed
between a developing country party and the international entity or entities referred to in article 11, in accordance with that article. The implementation of these commitments shall take into account the need for adequacy and predictability in the flow of funds and the importance of appropriate burden sharing among the developed country parties.
 
 UNFCCC 4.4.  The developed country parties and other developed parties included in annex ii shall also assist the developing country parties that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change in meeting costs of adaptation to those adverse effects.
 
FIFTH SYSTEMIC CONSTRAINT
A SOLUTION SHOULD NEVER BE EQUALLY BAD OR WORSE THAN THE PROBLEM IT IS INTENDED TO SOLVE
 
Some proposed solutions are false solutions. Such as nuclear  (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-robock/nuclear-energy-is-not-a-solution_b_5305594.html)
 
Such as geoengineering (https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/geoengineering-is-not-a-solution-to-climate-change/)
 
BIOFUEL (https://www.euractiv.com/section/agriculture-food/opinion/land-grabbing-still-a-huge-problem-in-eastern-europe/
 
 
http://www.stopafricalandgrab.com/
7 Years After Fukushima Disaster: Little Radioactive Material in US Waters
 
 
 
 
SIXTH SYSTEMIC CONSTRAINT
SOME STATES ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHER
 
 
20130106-202638.jpg
NORTH -SOUTH
 
From COP15/16 to COP21 the systemic constraint
some states are more equal than others were evident
 
All three cops discounted the evidence of the scientists and ignored the pleas of the developing countries
 
In cop15, the developed states' negotiators were relying on the 2007 intergovernmental panel on climate change report with data from 2004 and 2005, but the developing states were driven by new and evolving scientific data. Scientific reports at cop 15 revealed new data;
The world meteorological organisation reported more rapid global warming, more drought, and more frequent and severe climate related incidents, and that glaciers are melting faster than predicted in 2007 IPCC report.
The UN High Commission on Refugees noted that the world already had millions more refugees than expected,
because of climate change.
 
 At an IPCC press conference, a scientist from the IPCC warned that at a 2 degree rise in temperature, the poor, the vulnerable, and the disenfranchised would not survive, at a 1.5-degree rise, they might
 
In COP21, there must be compensation for historical emissions which have impacted vulnerable states, to avoid all false solutions such
as nuclear, geo-engineering and biofuels which would all violate principles within the UNFCCC,  
 
 SEVENTH SYSTEMIC CONSTRAINT
THE LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR THE TYRANNY OF CONSENSUS
 

Kevin Conra nEW NEGOTIATING FOR PAPUA  New Guinea 
 
A global vision would have been the striving for consensus with a fallback of 75 % especially within each article
 
 
 
at cop21 until the last versions, article 22; allowed for fallback
article 22 (voting)
1. Each party shall have one vote,
3. Without prejudice to the provisions of Paragraph 3 of Article 15 of the Convention, the parties shall make every effort to reach agreement on all matters by consensus. if such efforts to reach consensus have been exhausted and no agreement has been reached, a decision shall, as a last resort, be adopted by
a three-fourths majority vote of the parties present and voting.
4. For the purpose of this article, 'parties present and voting' means parties present and casting an affirmative
or negative vote.]
 
In a press conference of the UNFCCC secretariat I suggested that to avoid descending to the lowest common denominator.
Perhaps principle 22 could apply to each article. If there were a fallback to 75% in article 2 over 80 percent of the states would have agreed to keep the temperature below 1.5 and to have legally binding mitigation commitments for the major greenhouse gas emitters.
 
 
EIGHTH SYSTEMIC CONSTRAINT
THE FAILURE TO REVERSE THE EXEMPTION FOR THE CONTRIBUTION TO GREENHOUSE GAS EMMISSIONS
TO END THE EXEMPTION OF THE CONTRIBUTION OF MILITARISM TO GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
 
Army Air Corps Lynx Mk9A Helicopter Refuelling at Camp Bastion, Afghanistanphoto by Defence Images, on FlickrAn Army Air Corps helicopter at a refueling point in Afghanistan. The Pentagon has admitted to burning 350,000 barrels of oil a day.
 
 
 
 
It appears that the United States insisted on the inclusion of this exemption at the time of the Kyoto Protocol.
http://www.earthisland.org/journal/index.php/elist/eListRead/the_pentagons_hidden_impact_on_climate_change/
MILITARISM: THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM. DPI/NGO CLIMATE CHANGE CONFERENCE AT THE UNITED NATIONS
Excerpts from the September 7, 2007 Declaration, prepared by the NGO military nuclear matters and the NGO Peace Caucus was presented to the Chair, Rajendra K. Pachauri, of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
We call upon the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to investigate and estimate the full impact on greenhouse gas emissions by the military and demand that each state release information related to the greenhouse gas emissions from the production of all weapons systems, military exercises, from war games, weapons testing, military aviation, environmental warfare, troop transfer, military operations, waste generation, reconstruction after acts of violent interventions etc.;
We support the call for the disbanding of NATO, whose collective activities have contributed to not only the perpetuation of the scourge of war and the violation of international peremptory norms, but also the substantial release of greenhouse gas emissions:
(ii) call upon the member states of the United Nations to act on the commitment in Chapter 33 of Agenda 21, to reallocate military expenses;
(iii) call upon the United Nations General Assembly UNGA to acknowledge the inextricable link between climate change and conflict over resources such as oil, water etc.;
(v) call upon the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to investigate and estimate the full impact on greenhouse gas emissions by the military. and demand
that each state release information related to the greenhouse gas emissions from the production of all weapons systems, military exercises, from war games, weapons
testing, military aviation, environmental warfare, troop transfer, military operations, waste generation, reconstruction after acts of violent interventions etc.;
(vi) support the call for the disbanding of NATO, whose collective activities have contributed to not only the perpetuation of the scourge of war and the violation of international peremptory norms, but also the substantial release of greenhouse gas emissions.
 
CURRENT ESTIMATION OF GLOBAL MILITARY BUDGETS 
At COP16,"According to Dr. Joan Russow, of Global Compliance Research Project, “The US military operates in the shadows of climate negotiations, having demanded that their emissions be exempted from scrutiny or regulation This absolutely cannot continue: the climate crisis has reached the point where all of life – now and for future generations – is threatened. We cannot just ignore the largest polluter on earth, fight more wars over access to oil, and continue to feed this vicious cycle!”
Ironically, even the Pentagon recognizes that climate change is a “threat multiplier”, that will result in mass migrations, and far more wars and conflicts, threatening US “national security”. But their response is more of the same: build up fortress America, and run the military on liquefied coal and biofuels to reduce reliance on foreign oil. Their total disregard for human rights around the world is apparently from a 2003 Pentagon report, which calculated dispassionately: “Deaths from war as well as starvation and disease will decrease population size, which overtime, will re-balance with carrying capacity.”
(http://pejnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=9919:militarisms-contribution-to-greenhouse-gas-emissions&catid=86:i-earth-news&Itemid=210)
 
 At Cop 21, Ban Ki-Moon urged states to negotiate with a "global vision" not with national vested interests. (A paraphrase of his statement at a COP21press conference)
 
 There is an unclear relationship between the UNFCCC and what came out of Paris. Unless the voluntary contributions become revised and
firm commitments, made to address the global carbon budget and to keep well below 1.5 degrees, the Paris Agreement will undermine
Article 2 of the UNFCCC, (stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic with the climate system)
 
A global vision to implement article 2 would be, at a minimum, to immediately end all subsidies for fossil fuel, (no tar sands, no pipelines and no tankers) to divest in fossil fuels, and reinvest in socially equitable and environmentally sound renewable energy, to not use “transition “to justify reinvestment in the continuation of the fossil fuel industry, to calculate the carbon budget for each province,
o enforces fair share of the carbon budget, 
 
To commit to 25% reduction of GHGs emissions below 1990 levels by 2020, 35% below 1990 by 2025, 50% below 1990 by 2030, 60 %below 1990 by 2035. 75%below1990 by 2040 to 100 % below 1990 by 2050 to decarbonisation by 2050, and 100% socially equitable and environmentally sound renewables.
 To compensate for historical emissions which have impacted vulnerable states, to avoid all false solutions, such as nuclear, geo-engineering and biofuels which would all violate principles within the UNFCCC.  
 
 
NINTH SYSTEMIC CONSTRAINT:
RELUCTANCE TO USE THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE AGAINST THE MAJOR EMMITTERS FOR THEY VIOLATIONS OF ARTICLE 2 OF THE UNFCCC
Legal Remedy
Once there is a legally binding agreement, then the delinquent states should be taken to the International Court of Justice for failing to discharge the obligations under the UNFCCC.
In addition, major greenhouse gas-producing states must be forced to implement the actions that would discharge the obligations incurred when they signed and ratified the UNFCCC (provisions of the UNFCCC have become international peremptory norms and as such are binding) another legal obligations and be forced to repay the emission debt. Historic emissions should be calculated and an assessment made of the degree of dereliction of duty in the implementation of the UNFCCC. From these assessments, provisions must be made to compensate the states that have been most damaged by the failure, of the major greenhouse gas emitting states, to discharge obligations under the Convention. In such cases, a fund should be set up to assist vulnerable states in taking delinquent states to the International Court of Justice, including the Chamber on Environmental Matters (http://www.icjcij.org/presscom/index.php?pr=106&p1=6&p2=1&search=%22%22Compositionof the Chamber for Environmental Matters. There should be a campaign to have all states respect the jurisdiction and decisions of the International Court of Justice.
 
 
TENTH SYSTEMIC CONSTRAINT.
IGNORING COMMITMMENT FOR FUNDING SOURCE
 
 
 Forty years ago, in 1976, all member states affirmed:
The waste and misuse of resources in war and armaments should be prevented. All countries should make a firm commitment to promote general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control, in particular in the field of nuclear disarmament. part of the resources thus released should be utilized so as to achieve a better quality of life for humanity and particularly the peoples of developing countries (II, 12 Habitat 1)
 
and at UNCED, all states made the commitment; 
The funds should be transferred to implementing the above to institute fair and just transition for workers and communities affected by the above.
 
In conclusion. If these systemic constraints are avoided, hopefully, COP22 will finally address the urgency of climate change and there will be a legally binding agreement supported in each article by at at least 75% vote, Then the states which have agreed to the strong legally binding document to implement the UNFCCC could take the rogue states to the international
Court of Justice for violating Article2 of the UNFCCC
 
From the 2010 Cocama Conference - Speech by Nimmo Bassey at the Opening Ceremony of the conference
 
Nimmo Bassey represented Friends of the Earth and Africa at the Conference. After his opening remark she recited the following poem. If you don’t leave crude oil in the soil Coal in the hole and tar sands in the land I will confront and denounce you
 
http://pejnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=9539:if-you-dont-leave-crude-oil-in-the-soil-coal-in-the-hole-and-tar-sands-in-the-land-i-will-confront-and-denounce-you-&catid=86:i-earth-news&Itemid=210
 
 
At COP21 Ban Ki-Moon urged states to negotiate with a global vision not from specific national interests” What cop21 should have been was a new global vision with legally binding actions to finally implement the binding commitments and principles in the UNFCCC
 
Not what was proposed ``compromise does require us to forget the ideal solution for everyone. That is the work we have now. we are close to the finishing line and we must find common ground. in other words, time to come to an agreement`
 
 

20130106-202638.jpg

 
Last Updated on Friday, 07 June 2019 18:04
 

Latest News