The Heat is on: GHG emissions hit new RecordsShift towards Emerging Countries
Summary: Global GHG emissions continue to rise and a steady and logical shift towards the emerging countries (e.g. BRICS) is notable. That will be one of the key reasons will the recent Obama plan as well as the Germany led 'Energiewende' will fail, i.e. won't hardly result in any lowering of global warming effects.
Reprint: Greenhouse gas emissions worldwide rose by 1.4 percent last year, setting a new record, according to data released Monday.
The findings, from the International Energy Agency (IEA), come just weeks after scientists in Hawaii recorded carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere higher than 400 parts per million, another modern record. The data suggests that the globe could warm well more than the two degrees Celsius that climate scientists have set as an acceptable level by the end of this century, a target towards which international negotiations are currently working. “Climate change has quite frankly slipped to the back burner of policy priorities. But the problem is not going away – quite the opposite,” Maria van der Hoeven, the IEA’s executive director, said Monday at the launch of a special report on the issue.
“The path we are currently on is more likely to result in a temperature increase of between 3.6 and 5.3 degrees C, but … much more can be done to tackle energy-sector emissions without jeopardising economic growth, an important concern for many governments.”While such estimates have been published previously, the warnings and a set of detailed recommendations are particularly significant coming from the IEA. The Paris-based organisation was set up in the early 1970s to coordinate global oil supply, and continues to advise primarily the world’s richest countries.
“It’s one thing for an environmental group to be saying this, but the IEA is a very respected authority on energy markets and policy, with lots of analytical capacity,” Nathaniel Keohane, the vice-president for international climate at the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), an advocacy group here, told IPS. “This is an organisation founded to respond to the oil shock of the 1970s, yet they’re saying that a ‘climate shock’ is what we now have to watch for, in terms of threat to long-term economic prosperity. This report helps point us in a direction of where we need to go in the near term to try to get back on track.” Read the full article... next article... supporting white paper...
The findings, from the International Energy Agency (IEA), come just weeks after scientists in Hawaii recorded carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere higher than 400 parts per million, another modern record. The data suggests that the globe could warm well more than the two degrees Celsius that climate scientists have set as an acceptable level by the end of this century, a target towards which international negotiations are currently working. “Climate change has quite frankly slipped to the back burner of policy priorities. But the problem is not going away – quite the opposite,” Maria van der Hoeven, the IEA’s executive director, said Monday at the launch of a special report on the issue.
“The path we are currently on is more likely to result in a temperature increase of between 3.6 and 5.3 degrees C, but … much more can be done to tackle energy-sector emissions without jeopardising economic growth, an important concern for many governments.”While such estimates have been published previously, the warnings and a set of detailed recommendations are particularly significant coming from the IEA. The Paris-based organisation was set up in the early 1970s to coordinate global oil supply, and continues to advise primarily the world’s richest countries.
“It’s one thing for an environmental group to be saying this, but the IEA is a very respected authority on energy markets and policy, with lots of analytical capacity,” Nathaniel Keohane, the vice-president for international climate at the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), an advocacy group here, told IPS. “This is an organisation founded to respond to the oil shock of the 1970s, yet they’re saying that a ‘climate shock’ is what we now have to watch for, in terms of threat to long-term economic prosperity. This report helps point us in a direction of where we need to go in the near term to try to get back on track.” Read the full article... next article... supporting white paper...
Kommentare
Kommentar veröffentlichen