theglobaljournal.net: Latest activities of group Michel Jarraud

Durban Take Heed: The Earth is Heating Up

2012-02-10T18:27:43Z

There is no question that the earth is warming up and that it is due to human activity, according to the report delivered to the UN Climate Change conference that opened in Durban, South Africa (November 28). The results of the report by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) were made public simultaneously in Durban and Geneva.

WMO Secretary-General Michel Jarraud said the role of his organization is “to provide the scientific knowledge to inform action by decision makers…Our science is solid and it proves unequivocally that the world is warming and that this warming is due to human activities,” he said.

Global temperatures in 2011 were said to be the tenth highest since the start of records in 1850. This was despite the weather phenomenon known as La Niña which has a cooling and drying influence – as versus El Niño which causes excessive rainfall, floods and rising tides. The 13 warmest years have all occurred in the 15 years since 1997, the report notes.

Many scientists believe that warmer weather and warmer water is driven by carbon emissions which cause global warming during certain years in which there are large El Niño events. Strong La Niña years typically bring between 0.10° to 0.15°C cooler temperatures than preceding and following years.

“Concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere have reached new highs," said Jarreau, adding that average global temperatures are rapidly approaching levels consistent with a rise of 2.4°C. “Scientists believe (this) could trigger far reaching and irreversible changes in our Earth, biosphere and oceans,” he said. The extent of Artic sea ice in 2011 was the second lowest on record and its volume was also the lowest.

The WMO report was provisional in that it only measured the period January-October 2011 during which time the combined sea and land air temperature was 0.41°C above the 1961-1990 annual average of 14°C.

Jarraud said scientists have noticed that “weak La Niña conditions have re-developed in recent weeks but have not yet approached the intensity of those in late 2010 and early 2011.” Climate disasters during this 10 month period included severe drought in Africa, major floods in Pakistan, Central and South America, extreme weather events in the US and unusually dry periods in Europe and eastern China.

How much of an impact the WMO report will have on the complex deliberations in Durban is difficult to gauge but at least the conferees cannot say they didn’t know.

(Photo © DR)

Climate Accords At Risk from Vested Interests

2012-02-10T18:25:18Z

The UN’s climate change panel (IPCC) has warned that if measures are not taken to lower global CO2 emissions between 50 and 85% by the year 2050, it will be too late to halt the rise of the earth’s average temperature above the 2 degree Celsius mark.

The question remains: how strong is the political will to heed this warning - despite the last-minute agreement reached in Durban (December 11) by nearly 200 countries to adopt a legal agreement on climate change by 2015 which won’t go into effect until 2020?

The accord that was finally reached at the end of the week-long conference is largely a stop-gap measure designed to keep the current 1997 Kyoto protocol in effect until a new agreement is adopted.

The good news is that - unlike Kyoto - the Durban deal would put all countries, including the world’s top emitters - China, India, Brazil and the US - under the same legal regime to enforce commitments made to control greenhouse gases.

The bad news is that there are indications that some countries are dragging their feet. The day after Durban ended, Canada announced it will no longer abide by Kyoto although it will honor its pledge for a new accord by 2020.

“We don’t expect other countries to follow suit,” said Jonathan Lynn, director of communications at IPCC in Geneva. “Canada was clearly concerned that under Kyoto they would have to pay a penalty and that’s why they’ve withdrawn.” Rather than reduce greenhouse gases as promised under Kyoto, levels have risen by more than 4% largely due to Canada’s embrace of tar sand mining, resulting in an enormous fine.

Pressure from coal and oil lobbies is also compromising efforts to go green in the US and other industrialized countries. While the Obama administration tries to encourage investment in renewable energies by granting tens of billions in special subsidies, oil and gas production has boomed thanks to private investment.

Both the IPCC and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) noted that many of the studies denying that human activity plays a major role in global warming are funded by coal and oil interests.

“Some of this funding does come from vested interests,” said WMO spokeswoman Claire Nullis. She cited a recent study by scientists from the University of Berkley - funded by the coal industry - that disputed the WMO graphs about warming temperatures. However, the move backfired: “They came up with very similar findings and that has caused a lot of unhappiness - to put it mildly - among those who would deny that global warming is taking place and that it is human-induced.”

A World Climate Organization?

2012-02-10T18:24:31Z

Interview with Michel Jarraud, Secretary-General World Meteorological Organization

Imagine that your organization did not exist and you were asked to invent it. What would you do? How would it be fundamentally different from what exists? What would be the differences regarding mandate, resources and objectives?

To answer your question, I cannot avoid giving a little background. Weather and the climate ignore all borders. No country can handle, even in a limited way, the problem in a national context. It is essential to have a global approach and cooperation is essential. The solution that was set up is based on a number of assumptions that I think are still valid. Given this global nature, all countries must share information, make observations with the same standards, in the same way, in a coordinated, synchronized and transparent manner. If we tried to do this on a bilateral basis, it would take about 17,000 bilateral agreements - it couldn’t work. Only one organization can do it. Second, every single government on the planet must accept responsibility for protecting the lives of its citizens. This responsibility is often interpreted in a military way, but it also includes “protection against natural disasters” and that would require creating a multilateral intergovernmental organization with universal membership. So, we are already talking about something like WMO, because we have no choice. The third aspect to coordinate and synchronize is the decision-making process. Multilateral institutions are criticized for their cumbersome decision-making process. In a scientific and technical institution such as WMO it is difficult to reach a decision, but, once a decision is made, it is very sound because this consensual process is remarkably well suited. It may not be appropriate in all cases, but it has been shown to work; it has resisted two World Wars, the Cold War and many other upheavals. On the other hand, the world has changed and there are probably a number of things one would do differently today. When WMO was established, they were thinking much more in terms of weather forecasting and much less about the problem of climate, which was then considered a question for the discipline of geography. Times have changed, but this idea has been recognized in the WMO mandate only very recently. So, if we tried to create something new, we would try to consolidate it in an even more logical, clearer and more specific fashion. If you have a very focused mandate, the tendency

To read the full interview, order a copy of the magazine.