A fair COP?The Paris Climate Change Treaty

John Lanchbery

What I shall talk about• From 30th November to 11th December, the

nations of the World will meet in Paris to conclude a new treaty on climate change.

• In this talk, I first chart the rise of scientific knowledge about the greenhouse effect and climate change.

• I then look at how the political process grew, leading to UN treaties.

• Then I guess what will happen in Paris.• Finally, I talk about what NGOs do – or

anything else on demand.

Sir Frederick William Herschel FRS (1738-1822)

Hannover-born English astronomer.In addition to composing twenty four symphonies, discovering Uranus, two of the moons of Saturn and building huge telescopes, Herschel discovered infrared radiation or what he called Calorific Rays.On 11th February 1800, he noticed that a thermometer left on a bench off the red end of a spectrum of the Sun became warm. He concluded that there must be heat radiation in the solar spectrum that could not be seen.

Joseph Fourier (1768-1830)

An orphan, imprisoned in the Terror but later a mathematician, physicist,

Governor of Lower Egypt, Prefect of Isère, Secretary of the French Academy of Sciences, originator of the Fourier series and Fourier transform which form the basis of modern waveform analysis and telecoms.In papers published in 1824 and 1827, Fourier calculated that an object the size of the Earth at the distance it lies from the Sun, should be considerably colder than it actually is if it is warmed only by solar radiation.

John Tyndall, FRS (1820-1893)

Professor of Natural Philosophy (Physics) at the Royal Institution from 1853. Tyndall measured the capacities of gases to absorb radiant heat (infra-red radiation).In 1861 he said, “It is exceedingly probable that the absorption of the solar rays by the atmosphere ... is mainly due to the watery vapour contained in the air.”...“Every variation of this constituent must produce a change in climate. Similar remarks would apply to the carbonic acid [carbon dioxide] diffused through the air.”Tyndall explained the "greenhouse effect" in a public lecture in January 1863 entitled "On Radiation Through The Earth's Atmosphere“.

Svante Arrhenius, FRS(1859-1927)

Swedish physicist and chemist, father of chemical physics, Nobel Prize for Chemistry (1903).Arrhenius calculated how changes in the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere could alter the Earth’s surface temperature by the greenhouse effect. (ΔF = αln(C/Co)

Arrhenius predicted that emissions of carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels and other combustion processes were large enough to cause global warming.He was criticised by the first climate sceptic (Knut Ångström) in 1900 who maintained that carbon dioxide infra-red absorption bands were already saturated.(Ångström was wrong.)

20th CenturyThe greenhouse effect and climate change trundled on as well known but largely ignored scientific facts.After all, the greenhouse effect kept the Earth’s surface at between 30 and 40oC more than it would otherwise be.Without it there would be no life on Earth.In the 1950s, some scientists began to worry that we were putting an ever increasing amount of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere and that the possibility of significant human-induced climate change was likely.Concern grew rapidly in the late 1970s, leading first to global scientific meetings and then political ones.

The rise of carbon dioxide

World Climate Conferences (WCC)The World Meteorological Organisation held the first WCC in Geneva in February 1979.This set up scientific programmes, leading in 1988 to the current global scientific body, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).Political efforts in the mid-1980s, led in large part byMargaret Thatcher, Indira Gandhi and Gro Brundtland, ended with the UN declaring in1988that the climate was a “common heritage ofmankind”, the precursor to a UN treaty.Following a series of scientific meetings, the second WCC in November 1990 launched negotiations on a climate convention which was concluded in Rio in 1992.

The UN Rio Convention

The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change of 1992 was a huge step forward.Because climate change is a global problem, in terms of both emissions and impacts, it needs global efforts to solve it.However, although the UNFCCC provided a good regulatory framework, it did not oblige countries to do much in terms of limiting emissions.It asked developed countries (defined as OECD members) to aim to stabilise emissions at 1990 levels by 2000.

The Kyoto ProtocolAt the first conference of the parties (COP) of the climate convention it was agreed that the convention was insufficient to tackle climate change.A process thus began to negotiate a new treaty, concluded in 1997 in Kyoto.The Kyoto Protocol contained many innovations, such as carbon markets.However, it still only obliged OECD countries to have targets and these only added up to an emission reduction of 5% by 2012 – and the USA left anyway.

Click icon to add picture

In the meantime ...Emissions continue to rise.Carbon dioxide emissions from those developed countries that originally signed the Kyoto Protocol (including the USA) fell by 7.5% between 1990 and 2010. Too little.Global emissions, however, rose by 45% in the same period, predominantly due to a colossal rise in emissions from China and, to a lesser extent, India – not counting emissions from deforestation and land use at a quarter of all emissions.Yet according to the IPCC, we have already used about two thirds of the cumulative carbon dioxide emissions budget consistent with an emissions pathway that keeps us below 2oC and we have only about 1000 billion tonnes left.We therefore need to be cutting global emissions sharply now - but we are not.

The two degree limitIn 2009 and then again in 2010, all countries agreed that to avoid the worst impacts of climate change we need to keep average surface temperature rise to less than 2O Celsius.

Two degrees: the IPCC on nature“A large fraction of both terrestrial and freshwater species face increased extinction risk under projected climate change during and beyond the 21st century, especially as climate change interacts with other stressors, such as habitat modification, over-exploitation, pollution, and invasive species (high confidence).Extinction risk is increased under all scenarios, with risk increasing with both magnitude and rate of climate change. Many species will be unable to track suitable climates under mid- and high-range rates of climate change (i.e., RCP4.5, 6.0, and 8.5) during the 21st century. Lower rates of change (i.e., RCP2.6) will pose fewer problems.”

How will Paris help?A big difference between now and the previous climate treaties is that all governments realise that we are in a dire predicament.They recognise what the science says.They know that they need to act and bickering about who is to blame and who needs to act has lessened – although it still occurs.Another difference is that countries have said what they will do at home before the big meeting – rather than haggle late into the final night as before.

Commitments to cut emissionsMore than 160 (of the 195) countries have now submitted details of how they plan to tackle climate change through to 2025 or 2030.These plans cover about 90% of global emissions.The UN and others have calculated that this is consistent with a global temperature rise of 2.7oC, assuming action continues after 2030.Whilst this is insufficient, it is much better than the current emissions pathway that would take us to more than 4oC.We NGOs are this pushing for a “ratchet” which ensures that emissions are cut by more over time.

Other key matters

Finance will be a key part of any deal.It is needed both to support emission reductions and adaptation to climate change in poor countries.Developed countries have already promised to deliver US$100 billion/year to poor countries from 2020 onwards. It is important that this is done.The extent to which “loss and damage” is recompensed is another key matter – but hard to agree.

Other possible stumbling blocksThe extent to which countries are “differentiated” in terms of how much they should do and how much they fund is important.Whilst everyone agrees that the poorest need help, differentiating between developed and emerging economies, if at all, is contentious.Indeed, many countries currently classed as developing are clearly not, with half of the top ten richest countries officially classed as developing – as well as many of the highest emitters per capita.

HoweverAt the climate talks in Bonn a few weeks ago there was a clear mood to succeed.This mood is supported by increasingly vocal ambition from leaders together with mutually supportive bilateral deals:USA/China, UK/India, USA/India, etc.So far, at least ninety leaders are scheduled to come to the first day of the COP including:Obama, Xi Jinping, Modi, Merkel, Zuma, Dilma, Cameron and, of course, Hollande.

High and low scenarios

A UN view of organisationsThe UN divides people into four main classes:Governmental, meaning government officials and ministers but not opposition politicians.UN, like the UN agencies, UNEP, FAO, WMO.Intergovernmental, like the OECD and IEA.Non-governmental: everyone else including local government, business, academics, environment groups and development groups.Non-governmental organisations (NGOs) organise themselves into “constituencies” which reflect their views.Only governments formally negotiate.

NGOs – groups within groupsThe RSPB goes to the UN climate talks as BirdLife.In Paris we will have people from the UK, France, Germany, Spain, the USA, Nigeria, Nepal, Ecuador and New Zealand.Long ago (1989) the environmental groups decided that they would be more effective if they spoke with one voice so we formed the Climate Action Network (CAN).CAN later expanded to include development groups too.The RSPB (and BirdLife) belongs to CAN along with WWF, Greenpeace, Oxfam, Christian Aid and about 900 other organisations Worldwide.

What do the NGOs really do?We work a lot in groups shadowing topics being negotiated. I chair the CAN group on land use and forests – about 200 people listed.Groups meeting daily and have email list servers.Group chairs and country regional coordinators meet daily.We meet regularly with the countries and country groupings – both before and during meetings.We talk a lot to individual negotiators, and email them.