Date: 12/12/2015 14:41:58
From: CrazyNeutrino
ID: 812961
Subject: Paris climate talks

Paris climate talks: French foreign minister Laurent Fabius certain ‘historic’ deal will be agreed

French foreign minister Laurent Fabius, host of the 195-nation climate-saving talks in Paris, says he will submit a historic deal to ministers later today and is certain it will be approved.

International climate change talks have been extended beyond the official deadline in an effort to secure a deal to curb global warming.

more…

Reply Quote

Date: 12/12/2015 23:25:54
From: CrazyNeutrino
ID: 813200
Subject: re: Paris climate talks

Paris climate talks: France releases ‘ambitious, balanced’ draft agreement at COP21

France has submitted a proposed 195-nation accord to curb emissions of the heat-trapping gases that threaten to wreak havoc on Earth’s climate system.

French foreign minister Laurent Fabius, the host of the talks in Paris, said the draft climate deal would limit global warming to “well below 2 degrees Celsius, perhaps 1.5”.

more…

Reply Quote

Date: 13/12/2015 06:03:00
From: Ian
ID: 813257
Subject: re: Paris climate talks

At Paris Climate Talks, Negotiators Agree to Save the World

LE BOURGET, France — After two weeks of weighing and measuring, 195 countries appear to have converged on a deal to save the world from global climate change. The key: an agreement that countries will curtail emissions to keep global temperatures from rising much higher than 1.5 degrees C above historic averages.

Expert reviewers have praised the newest, final draft agreement from the COP21 talks in Paris as scientific, balanced, and—perhaps most importantly—ambitious. In all, the document appears to do something nobody thought possible, which is look out for the needs of developing countries while also sending a strong signal to investors that they should start shifting their resources to things that don’t destroy Earth.

It will take a few days before scientists, economists, and policy experts have a complete grasp of the agreement’s implications, but for now, most seem positive. Perhaps most exciting, from a scientific standpoint, are the provisions backing up the document’s ambitious temperature goals. Countries will need to have net zero greenhouse gas emissions sometime in the second half of the 21st century. For the 2 degrees C goal, that’s net zero between 2080 and 2090, and for 1.5 degrees C between 2060 and 2070, says Jennifer Morgan, World Resources Institutes global climate director.

According to Michael Jacobs, policy advisor for New Climate Economy, that language will send a strong signal to businesses and investors. “Businesses wanted a signal about how the future economy would be shaped,” he says. That signal is that governments are committed an irreversible downward carbon trend, so invest accordingly, because the relevant sectors of the economy are going to succeed.

The document also ensures developed countries will give money to developing countries to cope with the effects of climate effects already happening—and those to come. That money will also help developing countries to decouple their economies from greenhouse gases, and measure their ongoing emissions every five years.

Countries big and small, developed and developing, all indicated support for the document. Even India, notable for its size, population, and potential energy demands in the coming decades, seemed to be ready to sign on.

Notably absent from the document are any mentions of restrictions on air travel or shipping. Those two industries count for 2.1 and 3.2 percent of current greenhouse gas emissions, respectively, but also have a profound impact on the global economy. Also, the agreement doesn’t hold rich countries liable for the damages climate change has already wreaked on poor countries—in other words, no reparations for centuries of emissions.

But hey, that’s international negotiations for you. And stacked against the backdrop of 20 years of failed climate agreements, these negotiations went very well. “Many condemned this process for being too slow,” says Thomas Spencer, climate director for Institute for Sustainable Development and International Relations. “But I think we have the proof here that it was worth it.” And besides, this is really just the start. A signed paper will be one thing; now the work of building a new global economy begins.

wired

Reply Quote

Date: 13/12/2015 06:05:15
From: Ian
ID: 813258
Subject: re: Paris climate talks

ABC radio is reporting that they have signed off on the agreement.

WIBF

Reply Quote

Date: 13/12/2015 08:21:20
From: Ian
ID: 813274
Subject: re: Paris climate talks

Historic Paris climate pact reached – experts react

After two weeks of negotiations in Paris, the world’s nations have reached a global deal to tackle climate change (read the text here). The agreement commits 196 countries to help limit global warming to “well below 2℃ above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5℃”.

Under the agreement:

* Countries will pursue their self-determined emissions targets from 2020 onwards.
* The national targets will be reviewed and strengthened every five years.
* Global emissions should peak “as soon as possible”. By the second half of this century, greenhouse gas emissions should be balanced out by sinks, processes that remove them from the air.
* Developed nations will contribute at least US$100 billion a year from 2020 to help poorer nations deal with climate change.



Below, our experts react to the agreement:

Robyn Eckersley, Professor of Political Science, University of Melbourne

The signature achievement of the Paris Agreement is a much bolder temperature target than expected: a ceiling of 2℃ warming, plus the pursuit of the safer target of 1.5℃.

Yet the parties have formally acknowledged that the 185 national pledges submitted thus far for the post-2020 period are well short of what is required to prevent dangerous climate change. The success of the Paris Agreement will therefore turn on how quickly the parties are able to ratchet up their ambition over time.

The good news is that the parties have agreed to relatively short, five-yearly cycles of nationally determined contributions. They have also agreed that each successive contribution shall be a progression beyond the previous one and reflect each party’s highest possible ambition.

The bad news is that there is no requirement that the parties must review and upgrade their existing pledges before 2030, although they may voluntarily choose to do so at any time.

On a worst-case scenario, we could see no ratcheting up of pledges over the next 15 years, just as we have seen no shift in the Copenhagen 2020 pledges made in early 2010. This would require much more heroic efforts in subsequent cycles and make it much harder to reduce the risks of dangerous warming.

However, the worst-case scenario is unlikely. There will be a facilitative dialogue in 2019 to take stock of collective effort, and we can expect some parties to upgrade their existing pledge.

In 2020, parties are required to communicate their next round of contributions for the post-2025 and 2030 periods. Parties are also urged to formulate long-term emission reduction strategies. This will exert further pressure on parties to lift their horizons and their game.

Together these various provisions provide a clear signal for everyone, but especially the business community: there is only one direction for emissions to go, and that is down, and the faster the better.

http://theconversation.com/historic-paris-climate-pact-reached-experts-react-52091

Reply Quote