More

Christiana Figueres: Countries Need To Deepen Commitments To Cutting CO2 Emissions

ARTHUR MAX   12/20/10 11:18 AM ET   AP

Mexico Climate Conference

AMSTERDAM — The agreements reached at a global conference this month to help poor countries cope with climate change exceeded expectations but need to be followed up, the U.N.'s top climate official said Monday.

Christiana Figueres, head of the U.N. climate change secretariat, said all countries, especially in the industrial world, need to deepen their commitments to cut greenhouse gases and to quickly launch new funds to help developing countries adapt to global warming.

Pledges submitted so far to reduce emissions over the next decade amount to just 60 percent of what scientists say would be required to have a 50 percent chance to keep the Earth from warming more than 2 degrees Celsius (3.8 Fahrenheit) above preindustrial levels. Warming by more than 2 degrees, the U.N. scientists have said, could lead to severe changes in climate affecting agriculture, sea levels, water resources, human health and the survival of many species.

Figueres said the agreements reached 10 days ago in Cancun, Mexico, went farther than many expected – but not far enough.

"Cancun was a big step, bigger than many imagined would be possible," she said in a statement from her office in Bonn, Germany. "Governments renewed their trust in each other, but to succeed fully they need to press boldly ahead with what they have agreed."

She said the agreements were the most comprehensive package ever reached to help poorer countries deal with the impacts of global warming.

Her statement came as countries and environmentalists were still digesting the agreements adopted after two weeks of tough negotiations ending with an all-night session Dec. 11. Most analysts said the accords were enough to rescue the moribund negotiating process from potential collapse, but they deferred the most painful decisions at least for another year.

"I think, in the end, we did very, very well, and I think that the world did very well," Todd Stern, the chief U.S. delegate, said in a Sunday interview with the television program EnergyNOW.

The Cancun agreements established a Green Climate Fund that will be the main channel for delivering $100 billion a year in climate aid to developing countries from 2020. They also created a mechanism for giving them green technologies and set a framework for paying countries to preserve forests.

Under the accords, wealthy countries also are due to report by next May how much they will contribute toward an emergency $30 billion fund for developing countries to develop strategies for coping with global warming and to build their own low-carbon economies.

From the U.S. perspective, Stern said, the biggest achievements in Cancun were getting all countries, including China, India, Brazil and other rapidly expanding economies, to commit to climate action and outlining a system of reporting and verification to ensure those commitments are met.

Stern also said it may not be possible to reach a legally binding climate change treaty in the near future. But Cancun-like agreements that are accepted by consensus at the annual 193-nation climate conference are good enough for now, he said.

"The day will come when things are ripe for a legal agreement. And we'll be there when that's the case. But we just shouldn't hang ourselves up until that day comes," he said.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST GREEN

AMSTERDAM — The agreements reached at a global conference this month to help poor countries cope with climate change exceeded expectations but need to be followed up, the U.N.'s top climate offi...
AMSTERDAM — The agreements reached at a global conference this month to help poor countries cope with climate change exceeded expectations but need to be followed up, the U.N.'s top climate offi...
Filed by Zoe Triska  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 35
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Richard2
04:33 PM on 01/27/2011
"Ban Ki-moon, the United Nations secretary general who made global warming his personal mission, is ending his hands-on involvement with international climate change negotiations, the Guardian has learned.

In a strategic shift, Ban will redirect his efforts from trying to encourage movement in the international climate change negotiations to a broader agenda of promoting clean energy and sustainable development, senior UN officials said." The Guardian.

The officials said the change in focus reflected Ban's realisation, after his deep involvement with the failed Copenhagen summit in 2009, that world leaders are not prepared to come together in a sweeping agreement on global warming – at least not for the next few years.

Does this mean there won't be any more "Cancun" type Climate conferences? Who would pick up the bill?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Richard2
11:01 PM on 01/04/2011
Given the severe December weather in Great Britain, which had average temperatures the second lowest in over 300 years, given the New York Blizzard that hit at Christmas, given the Russian fishing vessels stuck in the ice north of Japan, and given the growing number of deaths in India from severe winter weather,

isn't it about time for the United Nations to propose raising 100 Billion dollars from the nations in the temperature climates of the Earth, to transfer to the nations in the northern part of the northern hemisphere, to help them cope with the severe weather that will be faced over the next 20 or 30 years, which may severely threaten the peoples of this area? Funds for northern Europe, and Russia, northern India, northern China, and Canada?

The infrastructure of these nations have not been hardened to deal with the cold winter weather of the 18th and 19th Centuries, which now is returning to our planet.

Perhaps the money pledged to fight Global Warming could simply be shifted into a new fund to help the people of the northern part of the Northern Hemisphere?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:30 PM on 01/17/2011
Cooling in and around Britain is predicted due to disruption of North Atlantic currents. None of the other events in your laundry list are out of the ordinary for winter.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Richard2
07:55 PM on 12/30/2010
"Bloomberg's incompetence highlights the danger of decision makers falling under the influence of the Global Warming scam. And now a woman is dead and many more are injured because municipal resources were diverted from preparing for an entirely predictable snowstorm, to preparing for an imaginary disaster toward the end of the century. We had ample warning, when the Mayor of the city that suffered the worst terrorist attack in the nation's history, announced in all seriousness that Global Warming was just as dangerous as terrorism. Now we have suffered a snowstorm, and we found out that city was unprepared. What happens if we were to suffer another 9/11. Does anyone seriously think that an administration obsessed with Global Warming will be ready?

And New York's example might scale up to the whole country and the world, as we stop to consider how many resources were diverted from planning for preventable disasters and terrorist attacks to hold conferences on global warming. How many schoolchildren have lost educational time memorizing environmentalist dogma, instead of learning to explore science as a field, rather than a dogma. No wonder American students are falling behind in mathematics and science, in an educational environment where rainbow colored globes matter more than actual knowledge." from Right Side News
02:05 PM on 12/27/2010
If only the weather would co-operate with their predictions of doom.

http://www.tahoedailytribune.com/article/20101227/NEWS/101229849/1001/RSS&parentprofile=
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
07:03 PM on 12/28/2010
Weather isnt Climate. Global warming doesnt erase winter.

Globally, it's a record hot year. it will likely end as hottest or 2cd hottest.

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2010november/
11:06 PM on 12/28/2010
Only if you believe James Hansen's manipulated data. To everyone else the "hottest decade on record" is a joke.

http://notrickszone.com/2010/12/27/german-climate-professor-slams-climate-religion/
photo
John Mainstream
I'm a Clinton Democrat that is now an independent.
01:39 PM on 12/24/2010
yawn....it's like trying to sell last year's fad items.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tresco
Sistagirl Laughin' Thingy Award Winner!
07:52 PM on 12/23/2010
I think they need to talk to the Chinese and Indians. Having this discussion limited to the post-industrial west is a waste.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Malcolm Hensley
Last of the Reagan Republicans
07:13 PM on 12/23/2010
No wonder the Republicans were so successful in painting this as wealth transfer! Hurt Democrats in the House!
We got a commitment out of developing nations to grow a little slower? If we shrink fast enough and pay the poor nations!!??!?!
And what did we accomplished to solve the problem? We are 60% of the way there to a 50% chance of actually helping???
Congress can solve this problem by imposing an environmental tax on all products made here or imported! Really want to reduce world wide emissions? Impose a tariff on imports made using dirty coal, no scrubbers, energy! Those products need to include the hidden cost in emissions and pollution! Do that and China won't be bringing on line 2 new dirty coal generations plants a week! Their products will cost to much!!!!
Anything else means we are not serious about this problem!
The world does not care if its European, American, or Asian emissions!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ReagansHeroes
I'm retiring and now reject fiscal conservatism...
01:14 PM on 12/23/2010
"The Cancun agreements established a Green Climate Fund that will be the main channel for delivering $100 billion a year in climate aid to developing countries from 2020. They also created a mechanism for giving them green technologies and set a framework for paying countries to preserve forests."

This climate change scam is all about money and redistribution of wealth. The U.N. wants money funneled to poorer countries from richer countries. Cap and Trade is an effort to increase taxes on the U.S., create wealth on Wall Street with a new commodity, and make Al Gore the first climate change billionaire. Why do these "scientists" go along with it... because of the money that funds them and their research. Pro-Climate Change researchers get money, those who have theories and research that oppose it, don't. What do the Climate Change followers get? A cause that they can follow. There's no difference between the Climate Change follower of today and the people who carried around Mao's little red book in the 60's. Both group were blind of the truth. What a scam.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Robco1
03:49 PM on 12/23/2010
Oh, you got one thing right, it is all about money: Koch Industries: Secretly Funding the Climate Denial Machine, Greenpeace March 2010
http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/campaigns/global-warming-and-energy/polluterwatch/koch-industries/

The Heritage Foundation - Koch Industries Climate Denial Front Group:
$1,620,000 received from Koch foundations 2005-2008[Total Koch foundation grants 1997-2008: $3,358,000]

Joe Romm does a great job of showing how the right-wing spin machine at the Cato Institute continues to repeat lies about these hacked emails:http://climateprogress.org/2010/01/05/cato-institute-patrick-michaels-falsehood-stolen-emails-climategate-michael-mann-peer-review/

And you might be familiar with this: http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2010/12/13/reclaim-the-cyber-commons/
08:01 PM on 12/24/2010
You have proof they were 'hacked' and not 'leaked' by someone who developed a conscience? Has anybody ever been arrested?
08:03 PM on 12/24/2010
I bet you already know that the Climate Research Unit is funded by big oil?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ClimateHawk
Think before posting.
05:10 PM on 12/23/2010
In case you are not familiar with the science:

CO2 is a greenhouse gas.

We are taking massive amounts of carbon out of the ground and putting it into the air as CO2.

Unfortunately, we are putting CO2 into the atmosphere faster than the earth can take it up via photosynthesis and other mechanisms, so it is building up.

Hence the globe is warming. The net effect is about like putting a Christmas tree light on every square meter of the earth (say about 2 watts/square meter). This is far greater than the amount of forcing that causes the beginning or end of ice ages (which are believed to be caused by variations in the earth's orbit and tilt of axis).

The response of the climate to a forcing like this is "non-linear" and unpredictable. It will not be that the earth gets a little bit warmer all over. It will result in extreme weather events of all types. It will likely cause release of much more power greenhouse gases as permafrost melts.

Serious researchers are warning us that we have disrupted the balance of the climate sufficiently to cause very serious consequences.

If you agree with that, then what do you propose as a policy solution?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tresco
Sistagirl Laughin' Thingy Award Winner!
07:57 PM on 12/23/2010
H20 is even a more of a green house gass. What do you propose we do anout it?
08:05 PM on 12/24/2010
http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html

A list of 800 peer reviewed scientific papers that call into question the AGW meme.
03:53 PM on 12/22/2010
So let's say that the world gets its act together and cuts all CO2 emissions by 80% TOMORROW.

How long would we have to wait before the scientists could measure the impact that would have on global temperatures?

A decade? A century?

Our most sensitive satellite based equipment has a detection limit of +/- 0.05C per decade.

And what is the baseline to compare against? The temperature predictions that have been so wrong time and time again?

If we're going to kneecap our world economy and standard of living, shouldn't we have some way to measure whether or not it's even helping?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ClimateHawk
Think before posting.
09:26 AM on 12/23/2010
Hi Krug. Scientists could immediately measure the effect on CO2.

The temperature would continue rising because the effects of CO2 already in the air are "in the pipeline."

All the more reason we need to start now. Effects can take 10 - 20 years to show up.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ClimateHawk
Think before posting.
09:29 AM on 12/23/2010
It would boost our standard of living to be able to live on a planet that can sustain our livelihood.

Ever since U.S. oil wells started running dry, our economy has been precarious. We need to get off oil for many reasons.

Having a big push like the space program would be a great boost to the economy.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dragonmaster
11:53 AM on 12/22/2010
Deeper Cuts? Well this is an understatement

the cuts for now- with current scientific understanding will not prevent at least a 3 degree rise C in global temperatures by 2090 - and this is a very conservative prediction.
08:11 PM on 12/24/2010
That is, of course, if the model predictions are correct, which they haven't been.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
07:19 PM on 12/28/2010
The predictions are going well. The ocean and land continue to warm, the ice continues to melt.
photo
tooncesrocks
my micro bio is empty
09:00 PM on 12/21/2010
wow... just wow... cancun was a complete and total disateter... nothing more than a wholesale extension of the copenhagen accord. No commitments made... the US gets to pollute at will... and just pay a trifle to third world countries to offset the pollution. This helps how? The world is F'd if you call this progress.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SusanElizabeth1949
My micro-bio may be empty but my head isn't.
07:06 PM on 12/24/2010
I question if any moneys for that fund are ever appropriated, remember the House writes the funding bills.
08:13 PM on 12/24/2010
Six days of record cold temperatures certainly didn't help.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Trepasky
Sanity is neither free nor easy
08:10 AM on 12/26/2010
You seem to say a lot but it also appears biased?
Unusual cold temps are consistent with global climate change science.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ClimateHawk
Think before posting.
06:34 PM on 12/21/2010
Yes, Christiana. Tell it like it is!