Sydney Declaration ‘a whole lot of nothing’.
Sydney with +6m sea levels. The Sydney Declaration does nothing to prevent this.
Guy Pearse, author of the book High & Dry, sums up the recent ‘Sydney Declaration” (PDF) by APEC members concerning climate change in the Australian political e-zine Crikey APEC & climate change: a whole lot of nothing (subscription required).
The bottom line is this: the Sydney Declaration on climate change requires no country to reduce greenhouse emissions ever—essentially it is the Howard-Bush response writ large—no binding targets and timetables, just lots of credit-taking for business as usual as emissions continue spiraling.
Before last week’s meeting, according to ABARE (which reliably released another self-serving report on the eve of APEC) emissions across APEC were on track to rise 130% above 2004 levels by 2050. Nothing changed with the Sydney Declaration —even if the non-binding commitments are delivered. Why? Because these commitments require APEC to do nothing more than what is happening already. This is why it was so easy to get all the national leaders to sign.
But it looked like it said so much. The Sydney Declaration was lauded as a triumph for common sense, it seems to at least give a nod to the IPCC and call for 25% reduction by 2030, and it got everyone on board. That was the triumph. But
there were two non-binding aspirational goals: to reduce the energy intensity of GDP across APEC economies by 25% by 2030; and to increase forest cover across APEC countries by 20 million hectares by 2020. Most journalists swallowed the spin completely without realizing these goals constitute no change to business as usual and no reduction in greenhouse emissions across APEC. Energy demand is set to come close to doubling across APEC by 2030, so the intensity target is nothing like what is required to reduce emissions. And because energy efficiency is expected to improve at a faster rate than the intensity target requires it has no impact on emissions across APEC relative to business as usual.
So emissions remain on track to rise 130% across APEC by 2050. The commitment to increase forest cover by 20 million hectares by 2020 is similarly hollow, and the implication that this will save 11% of global emissions downright fraudulent. Why? Well firstly because between 2000 and 2005 there has been a net increase in forest cover across APEC of 1.5 million hectares annually so a continuation of business as usual would see the Sydney Declaration target met. So, as with the intensity target there is no impact on business as usual emissions which stay on track to rise 130%.
It’s sad but it honestly comes as no surprise that the Sydney Declaration amounted to little more than an attempt to undermine the Kyoto Protocol.
From an Australian national-interest perspective there is a vast amount to gain and very little to lose in Australia ratifying Kyoto and opening the world up to its considerable innovation in the carbon products arena.
All this loose talk in the oress about a “post-Kyoto” world is nonsense. Treaties don’t generally just expire like that. Phase one of the Kyoto protocol doesn’t even start until 2008 and the next round of discussions in Bali will be the major factor in deciding the direction for the second phase of the protocol which starts in 2012. You’ll note even the Sydney Declaration merely refers to the post-2012 world, and never mentioned the phrase “post-Kyoto”.
As a nation we can be part of the solution, and show global leadership, while enjoying long-term lifestyle improvements and economic efficiencies. Alas it’s these same lifestyle improvements and economic efficiencies that the so called ‘powers that be’ seem to genuinely fear and despise. — DS
Technorati Tags: Australia, business, carbon credits, China, climate change, emissions reduction, George W Bush, greenwash, IPCC, John Howard, media bias, politics, Sydney, Sydney Declaration
