14 Dec 2009: Opinion
Copenhagen: The Gap Between
Climate Rhetoric and Reality
As the UN conference enters its second and decisive week, the calls for strong global action to deal with climate change do not appear to be penetrating inside Copenhagen’s Bella Center.
One week down here in Copenhagen, and an enormous tide of words and images and sounds. There have been nonstop press conferences (the press briefing room at the Bella Center actually has bouncers to make sure the rhythm never stops), and an anarchist can’t throw a rock without hitting a blogger. On Sunday, I attended an incredibly beautiful service at the central Lutheran cathedral, where the Archbishop of Canterbury preached one of the most powerful sermons I’ve heard in years.
Week two will be even more talk. Heads of state begin rolling in Monday — Mohammed Nasheed of the Maldives will be one of the first to arrive. By Wednesday, expect serious limo-lock at the Bella Center, as premier after president after goon (e.g., Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe) takes to the podium. The tidal wave of talk builds to a crescendo on Friday when Barack Obama arrives, ready for the follow-up to his Nobel speech.
And the press will be covering the war of words with incredible diligence (in between searching out the couple of hundred violent souls hidden among the tens of thousands of peaceful protesters). You’ll read stories about “gaps opening” between blocs, and “positions hardening,” and on and on. By week’s end, though, the world’s leaders will have managed to put something down on paper, and most here will have blessed it as “good first step,” and back to the airport we all shall troop.
But here’s the thing: The words don’t count. None of them. If you want to understand what’s going on here, you need to shut out the words, the drama, the craziness, and just focus on numbers — and really just a few.
Outside the window, right now, the atmosphere contains 390 parts per million (ppm) of CO2. That’s too much — as a result, sea ice is melting, glaciers retreating, deserts spreading. Science has told us where we need to go: 350 ppm. There’s really not much pushback against that number — the UN’s chief climate scientist Rajendra Pachauri has made it clear that it’s a necessary target.
But it’s tough. Any chance of getting there would require governments deciding to concentrate all their energies on speeding the transition to renewable energy. We’d have to work with the same fervor we do when a war beckons. And, uh, we’re not.
How do we know that we’re not talking about doing nearly enough? We know because bright minds at Climate Interactive, a collaboration of the Sustainability Institute, the Sloan School of Management at MIT, and Ventana Systems — have a couple of nifty computer programs that allow them to plug in the proposals that countries have put on the table, push a button, and calculate what it means for the atmosphere.
So here’s the number at the moment. Take every plan — the meager American one, the more aggressive European targets, the Chinese promises to use less carbon per yuan of output, the Brazilian pledges about forests, the Maldives hope of going carbon neutral inside a decade. Push the button. In the year 2100, the atmosphere will contain 770 parts per million CO2.
That figure is actually getting worse. A few days ago it was 760 ppm, but then the Japanese reneged on a plan to aggressively cut their carbon, adding all sorts of hedges and conditions. 770 ppm is not 350. It’s not 450, which is what the big environmental groups were pushing for five years ago and what the Obama administration still takes as its target. It’s not 550 parts per million, which would be double the pre-industrial revolution concentration. It’s — if it’s not hell, it’s pretty much the same temperature.
None of the honeyed words that will be uttered in the next five days can cover up the stench of that number. 770 parts per million CO2, or 650, or 550, or 450 are, from what we can tell, a recipe for a failing planet. A journalist was interviewing me today, and he said: “You’re campaigning for 350, but you’d settle for 450, right?” Hell, I’d settle for 550. But what I want doesn’t matter. You’d have to go interview physics itself and ask what it would settle for — and my strong guess is that 350 is its bottom line and it’s not going to change.
So as you watch the proceedings from a distance this week, feel free to tune out most of the rhetoric. Hopes will rise, hopes will fall, hopes will soar, hopes will be dashed. But that carbon number, if it stays anywhere near its current range, is pretty much all that matters. The irony is, civil society around the world gets it: The “most widespread day of political action in the planet’s history,” according to CNN, rallied around the number 350 in demonstrations on Saturday.
At the end of the Archbishop of Canterbury’s sermon here in Copenhagen Sunday, the mighty church bell rang 350 times, and then church bells across Europe and around the world did the same. Demonstrators marched peacefully through the streets of Copenhagen by the tens of thousands on Saturday carrying 350 placards. Around the world, people held 3,000 candlelight vigils, spelling out the number with their flames.
But so far little of it has penetrated the Bella Center where these talks are underway. Those on the outside know the answer; those on the inside are trying mightily to come up with some convincing fudge.
POSTED ON 14 Dec 2009 IN Climate Climate Oceans Policy & Politics Asia North America North America
ABOUT THE AUTHORBill McKibben is a scholar in residence at Middlebury College. His The End of Nature, published in 1989, is regarded as the first book for a general audience on global warming. He is a founder of 350.org, a campaign to spread the goal of reducing atmospheric carbon dioxide to 350 parts per million worldwide. His most recent book is American Earth, an anthology of American environmental writing. In previous articles for Yale Environment 360, he has written about the threat of passing planetary boundaries and how the world will once again be waiting on the U.S. at the Copenhagen climate talks.
Recommend
Tweet
Reddit
Email
Print
Stumble Upon
ShareRELATED ARTICLES
As Extreme Weather Increases,
Bangladesh Braces for the Worst
Scientists are predicting that warming conditions will bring more frequent and more intense extreme weather events. Their warnings hit home in densely populated Bangladesh, which historically has been hit by devastating sea surges and cyclones.
Probing the Reasons Behind
The Changing Pace of Warming
A consensus is emerging among scientists that the rate of global warming has slowed over the last decade. While they are still examining why, many researchers believe this phenomenon is linked to the heat being absorbed by the world’s oceans.
Can a Divestment Campaign
Move the Fossil Fuel Industry?
U.S. climate activists have launched a movement to persuade universities, cities, and other groups to sell off their investments in fossil fuel companies. But while the financial impact of such divestment may be limited, the campaign could harm the companies in a critical sphere — public opinion.
In Tibet, Change Comes to the
Once-Pristine Roof of the World
Renowned biologist George Schaller has been traveling to the Tibetan Plateau for nearly three decades, studying its unique wildlife. But with climate change and overgrazing taking a toll on the landscape, he reports, scientists and the Chinese government are working to preserve one of the planet’s wildest places.
A Conservative Who Believes
That Climate Change Is Real
Republican Bob Inglis’ statement that he believed in human-caused climate change helped cost him his seat in Congress. In a Yale Environment 360 interview, Inglis explains why he is now trying to persuade his fellow conservatives that their principles can help save the planet.
MORE IN Opinion
As Extreme Weather Increases,
Bangladesh Braces for the Worst
Scientists are predicting that warming conditions will bring more frequent and more intense extreme weather events. Their warnings hit home in densely populated Bangladesh, which historically has been hit by devastating sea surges and cyclones.
As Final U.S. Decision Nears,
A Lively Debate on GM Salmon
In an online debate for Yale Environment 360, Elliot Entis, whose company has created a genetically modified salmon that may soon be for sale in the U.S., discusses the environmental and health impacts of this controversial technology with author Paul Greenberg, a critic of GM fish.
Should Polluting Nations Be
Liable for Climate Damages?
An international agreement to study how to redress developing nations for damages from climate change illustrates how ineffective climate diplomacy has been over the last two decades. But this move may pave the way for future court suits against polluting countries and companies.
Hurricane Sandy Relief Bill
Fails to Face Coastal Realities
As part of the sorely-needed aid package to help victims of Hurricane Sandy, Congress is also considering spending billions on ill-advised and environmentally damaging beach and coastal rebuilding projects that ignore the looming threats of rising seas and intensifying storms.
In U.S., the Lure of Export May
Further Fuel Natural Gas Boom
As the United States experiences a glut of natural gas, a host of facilities are being proposed that would convert gas to a liquid and export it. But before embracing a gas export boom, the nation should carefully weigh the implications for both the economy and the environment.
Will President Obama Seize
Moment on Climate Change?
Climate change received scant attention in the election campaign. But with public concern about global warming growing in the wake of Hurricane Sandy, President Obama has an unprecedented opportunity to take bold action on climate and clean energy.
Forget the Kyoto Accord
And Tax Carbon Consumption
Given the failure of international climate negotiations, a tax on carbon consumption is the most effective way of lowering CO2 emissions. If nations are serious about addressing climate change, then they must pay for the carbon pollution caused by what they consume.
Why Are Environmentalists
Taking Anti-Science Positions?
On issues ranging from genetically modified crops to nuclear power, environmentalists are increasingly refusing to listen to scientific arguments that challenge standard green positions. This approach risks weakening the environmental movement and empowering climate contrarians.
A Summer of Extremes
Signifies the New Normal
This summer has seen record heat waves and wildfires in the U.S, the worst flooding in Beijing’s modern history, and droughts that devastated the U.S. corn crop and led India to set up “refugee camps” for livestock. These extreme events were not freak occurrences — this is how the earth works now.
Natural Gas and Its Role
In the U.S. Energy Endgame
The boom in natural gas production has undeniable benefits for the United States. But two policy analysts argue that embracing a monolithic energy future dominated by gas will mean the loss of a golden opportunity: Leveraging cheap, abundant gas to create a sustainable future based on renewable power.
RELATED e360 DIGEST ITEMS
19 Jun 2013: Study Maps Likely Wildlife
Migration Corridors as Climate Warms
17 Jun 2013: Changes in Jet Stream Triggered
Record Greenland Melt in 2012, Study Says
10 Jun 2013: Carbon Emissions Increased
1.4 Percent in 2012, IEA Reports
07 Jun 2013: New Map of Antarctica Provides
Clearest Glimpse of Subglacial Continent
30 May 2013: Nuclear Power Has Prevented
1.84 Million Premature Deaths, Study Says
23 May 2013: China Poised to Launch
Much-Anticipated Carbon-Trading Project
21 May 2013: Large Majority of Americans
Believe Global Warming Should be a Priority
16 May 2013: Scientist’s U.S. Road Trip
Reveals Unexpected Methane Emissions
15 May 2013: Glaciers on Everest Disappearing
As Temperatures Rise, Snowfall Declines
14 May 2013: Interview: Climate Pioneer’s Son
Ponders a Worrisome CO2 Milestone
Yale Environment 360 is
a publication of the
Yale School of Forestry
& Environmental Studies.
SEARCH e360
CONNECT
Twitter: YaleE360e360 on Facebook
Donate to e360
View mobile site
Bookmark
Share e360
Email newsletter
Subscribe to our feed:
ABOUT
About e360Contact
Submission Guidelines
Reprints
e360 PHOTO GALLERY
South African photojournalist Adam Welz documents the harrowing relocation of six white rhinos to a region that has lost all its rhinos to poaching. View the gallery.
DEPARTMENTS
OpinionReports
Analysis
Interviews
e360 Digest
Podcasts
Video Reports
TOPICS
BiodiversityBusiness & Innovation
Climate
Energy
Forests
Oceans
Policy & Politics
Pollution & Health
Science & Technology
Sustainability
Urbanization
Water
REGIONS
Antarctica and the ArcticAfrica
Asia
Australia
Central & South America
Europe
Middle East
North America
e360 VIDEO
A Yale Environment 360 video explores Ecuador’s threatened Yasuni Biosphere Reserve with scientists inventorying its stunning forests and wildlife. Watch the video.
e360 MOBILE
from Yale
Environment 360 is now available for mobile devices at e360.yale.edu/mobile.
e360 VIDEO
In a Yale Environment 360 video, photographer Pete McBride documents how increasing water demands have transformed the Colorado River, the lifeblood of the arid Southwest. Watch the video.
Top Image: aerial view of Iceland. © Google & TerraMetrics.
e360 VIDEO
The Warriors of Qiugang, a Yale Environment 360 video that chronicles the story of a Chinese village’s fight against a polluting chemical plant, was nominated for a 2011 Academy Award for Best Documentary (Short Subject). Watch the video.
OF INTEREST
COMMENTS
It is too late for humankind. The numbers simply don't matter any more. If the boundary between survival and extinction was 750 ppm, humankind would blow right past it without a second thought.
The Sixth Great Extinction has begun and it won't end until humankind has gone extinct.
But the sun will keep on rising and the flowers will keep on blooming after humankind is gone. In the long run, humankind will join the rest of the extinct animals in the fossil record and that is all which will remain of human folly.
In fact, the gap arise from approachal difference of politicians and scientists.
Politicians have a short term mandate that means they have little interest in long term science, especially when action is costly. It’s a global game of economic chicken, where nations are avoiding being the first to subject their economies to the cost of mitigation and adaptation.
Scientists have failed to sufficiently engage the general public in the reasoning, unlike skeptics, who are good at misdirecting and supporting ignorance.
You're right, as much as I think the planet needs help and steps need to be taken in the right direction it's nearly impossible for government to do it, no matter how many speeches they give and how much "political effort" they put in to it. What really needs to take place is for a grassroots movement with regular folks all joining together to take steps in the right direction instead of waiting for the government to do it for us.
The Sixth Great Extinction has begun and it won't end until humankind has gone extinct.
Very rightly said - there's a very big gap between where we currently are and where we need to get in order to avoid irreversible climate changes. At the end of this week, when the world leaders release the compromise summit document and the "progress" made, it will be good to see some hard data rather than the pointless expansive text. It will be great if their efforts over the last two weeks being translated into real numbers (amount of money pledged to poor/island nations, target capacity for renewable energy sources, national GHG emissions reduction promised, etc.).
Comments have been closed on this feature.