Auteur : Kemal Dervis
Date : 11 février 2009
Par ailleurs, nous savons aujourd'hui avec certitude que les changements climatiques auront un impact plus important et plus immédiat sur un grand nombre de pauvres du monde. Notre souci d'assurer le développement et la réduction de la pauvreté, reflété dans les objectifs du Millénaire pour le développement, exige que nous atténuions les changements climatiques d'urgence, de manière à réduire les menaces que ces changements font peser sur les perspectives de développement pour les populations les plus vulnérables, et que nous agissions pour aider les populations déjà touchées à s'adapter.
Nous devons, pour atténuer les changements climatiques, réduire considérablement les émissions de gaz à effet de serre au cours des deux ou trois décennies à venir, en commençant dès à présent. Il s'agit pour cela de transformer fondamentalement notre économie fondée sur le carbone. Cette tâche peut paraître particulièrement difficile aujourd'hui, au moment où le monde fait face à une crise économique telle qu'il n'en a pas connu depuis plusieurs générations, mais je pense toutefois que les difficultés actuelles de la conjoncture économique ne sont pas une raison de remettre à plus tard l'application de mesures visant les changements climatiques. En fait, la situation actuelle nous offre une occasion toute particulière de renforcer notre riposte.
Pour parer à la récession et relancer la croissance, d'importantes expansions financières sont soit envisagées, soit appliquées. L'emploi d'une part de l'accroissement des dépenses publiques pour effectuer des investissements et créer des emplois écologiques est payant dans le court terme et vient compenser la réduction de la consommation et de l'investissement privés, mais il contribue aussi à la transition qui mènera à l'instauration d'une économie à faible taux de carbone. Nombreux sont ceux qui partagent cette idée et celle-ci a d'ores et déjà trouvé sa place dans certains plans de stimulation économique. C'est ainsi, par exemple, que le plan actuellement envisagé aux États-Unis prévoit d'allouer des ressources pour la réfection du réseau énergétique, l'amélioration de l'efficacité énergétique des bâtiments publics et des logements, l'accroissement de la production à base d'énergies renouvelables, et l'amélioration des transports en commun et ferroviaires pour réduire la consommation d'essence. La proposition de plan de stimulation de la Commission européenne relative contient des dispositions analogues. Le plan de stimulation de la Chine attribue également des ressources en vue de l'accroissement de l'efficacité énergétique et de la modernisation du réseau énergétique.
Cela indique, encore que ces initiatives pourraient être plus ambitieuses et mieux coordonnées au plan international, que l'on tire effectivement parti de la nécessité de faire face à la crise économique pour donner un coup de pouce aux efforts de réduction des émissions.
Mais ces mesures, à elles seules, ne suffisent pas. Les décideurs politiques doivent s'assurer à la 15e Conférence des Parties à Copenhague que ces investissements publics effectués en des temps difficiles ne soient pas gaspillés et s'assurer à cette fin d'un engagement à long terme en faveur de l'atténuation des changements climatiques.
Une impulsion financière contre-cyclique ne saurait à elle seule assurer l'efficacité et la profitabilité à long terme de ces investissements d'atténuation des changements climatiques. Nos économies ne continueront de favoriser une réduction drastique des émissions de gaz à effet de serre dans le long terme que si nous mettons en place des politiques qui offrent des encouragements et des financements forts et prévisibles en vue de l'atténuation des changements climatiques. Pour y parvenir, les prix doivent envoyer les signaux voulus aux ménages et aux entreprises et guider leurs décisions en matière de consommation et d'investissements en faveur de la réduction des gaz à effet de serre. Ils doivent donc commencer à refléter intégralement les coûts sociaux de l'émission de gaz à effet de serre ainsi que les avantages des options technologiques sans carbone.
Le monde attend de la 15e Conférence des Parties qu'elle parvienne à un accord mondial global, ambitieux, équitable et durable en termes d'applications techniques et de processus politiques dans les États souverains. Si certains arrangements d'échange de carbone sont déjà en place, notamment dans le contexte du Protocole de Kyoto et au niveau de l'Union européenne (UE), il est essentiel de déployer des efforts supplémentaires pour intégrer le prix du carbone de manière efficace et juste (conformément au principe des responsabilités communes mais différenciées dont il a été convenu dans la CCNUCC).
Il y a plusieurs façons de prendre en considération le prix du carbone. Les mécanismes de permis d'émission, les taxes sur le carbone, ou une combinaison de ces deux options, peuvent être opérantes. Les formules qui tiennent compte du prix du carbone et qui réduisent simultanément la volatilité peuvent être particulièrement attractives, en particulier à la lumière de l'extrême volatilité des prix des carburants fossiles de ces derniers temps. Face à cette extrême volatilité, les priorités d'investissement et les changements de comportement dans le sens d'une diminution des activités émettant des gaz à effet de serre risquent d'être inversés, ou de ne pas être adoptés du tout. Une taxe variable sur le contenu de carbone des carburants fossiles, forte quand les prix sont bas et se réduisant automatiquement quand les prix montent, pourrait être un instrument qui tiendrait compte du prix du carbone tout en réduisant la volatilité du coût utilisateur des carburants fossiles. Dans le long terme, un coût utilisateur plus stable présente des avantages à la fois pour les consommateurs et pour les producteurs de carburants fossiles. Une volatilité excessive des prix est source de difficultés pour la planification des investissements ainsi que d'inefficacités dans l'utilisation des ressources de carburants fossiles.
Tout arrangement visant prendre en considération le prix du carbone doit être examiné parallèlement à la nécessité de s'assurer que les pays en développement pourront répondre à leurs besoins énergétiques sans mettre en danger leur croissance économique et leurs efforts de réduction de la pauvreté. Il faut fournir aux pays en développement des appuis suffisants, à la mesure de leurs immenses besoins en matière de développement de leur infrastructure et d'élargissement de leur accès à l'énergie. Un programme financé par des donateurs pour subvenir aux coûts additionnels du choix des technologies les plus propres disponibles permettrait de s'assurer que ces besoins de développement seront satisfaits sans impact négatif sur les efforts d'atténuation des changements climatiques. Le programme pourrait être financé en partie par les revenus dégagés dans les pays riches par l'application de mécanismes de prise en compte du prix du carbone, à savoir par la vente aux enchères de permis d'émissions dans les systèmes de plafonnement et d'échanges et/ou par une taxe carbone.
Les décideurs politiques jouent un rôle positif en luttant contre la crise économique tout en tenant leur engagement d'agir face aux changements climatiques. Le monde espère que cet engagement sera honoré à Copenhague. De nombreuses questions seront inscrites à l'ordre du jour, notamment les normes d'efficacité et les subventions directes pour les nouvelles technologies. Des mécanismes de financement nouveaux et novateurs pour appuyer l'atténuation et l'adaptation dans les pays en développement devront faire partie intégrante d'une stratégie commune. Mais la prise en compte du prix du carbone de manière efficace, équitable et prévisible, par une combinaison de mécanismes de permis d'émissions et d'une taxation du carbone sous une forme ou une autre, devra figure au premier rang de l'ordre du jour.
- Imprimer
- Flux RSS des commentaires
-
Envoyer cet article à un ami
Date : 12 novembre 2009, 04:30
To all participants in the Forum
My daily observation show that the using of energy create so much C02 .
We need review all energy around us and think how to use it better ? Use more solar energy for dry clothes, foods, rice ... use win energy for light .
CO 2 in Factories and Industrial zone belong to government management .
We will control the energy in family : motobycycle, kitchen, car, and traditional habits .
In Vietnam 1 and 15 ( lunar caledar ) ,every month poeple pray and burn so much paper for died people
paper -money, paper clothes , paper house, paper car, paper bycycle .
We suggest the government control should give the guide to printing centers to choose the lay -out with big money value so people will burn less paper .
How about traditional habits in your's country ?
Let share
Thank you .
Date : 07 septembre 2009, 15:03
Hi,
I would like to introduce you one vision about how to tackle Climate Change consequences, as part of a bigger mechanism, and to hear your opinion regarding its feasibility.
Basics:
1. We experience very heavy economic crisis affecting many types of business and millions of people.
2. Many scientists conclude that the economic consequences from the worsening environmental situation resulting from climate change will be even heavier. For instance: the financial loses from just one hurricane are measured in hundreds of billions of dollars.
3. Energy issue and its multiple aspects "weight" more and more: growing needs, prices, abundance, political independence, degree of pollution, etc.
Unprecedented situation requires unprecedented steps. In this relation, I would like to ask you kindly to consider the possibilities described in Desert Ice Project - http://www.deserticeproject.com
There you will find a description of the project aimed to fight global warming (and many other related global problems like desertification / drought, food and water shortage, poverty, unemployment, illiteracy, illegal immigration, terror, violence and conflicts, etc.) by global, complex measures - global initiative / network of local focused solutions to specific regions.
If the situation is so bad and even going worse, we must not exclude any alternative.
The emphasis is on the belief that basically we can react to this knot of problems in two key ways:
1. By intensive greening (more trees and leafs - more absorbed CO2, preserved moisture/Water, more stable soil, more jobs, more own produced food by the locals, more income and profits, more stable economies and more well living people, improved security, etc.). This step alone won't help, because industrial pollution will go on.
2. By sophisticated filtering and energy efficient systems radically reducing heat-trapping gases that flow in the atmosphere all shaped in one international system of standards, which does not allow one to take unfair advantage compared to the others. Only limiting our greenhouse emissions (CCS techniques alone) won't help, because desertification, drought, water/food shortage and following social problems will continue. So, there must be applied both methods.
This is a large economic initiative that will mobilize many sectors of business - engineering, construction, banking, security, education, agriculture, science, etc. DIP includes large infrastructure projects, that will attract large contractors, and long chain of subcontractors; taking credits; reconsidering ideas that were underestimated so far. For instance: directing resources to "green" production, let say solar panels will open a lots of new jobs in this sector, and this will lower the prices, which will make these panels more accessible by more people. And then the government may oblige business and households for their massive usage - for every car / building roof, for every cell phone and laptop, etc.
Unlike the geo-engineering projects this operation is the most natural one. It only reverses the "negative geo-engineering" that we already did to some places in our planet - deforestation, pollution, too much land used for grazing, etc. Many of its stages are applied already in different parts of the world. They just need to be connected in one system.
Many requirements set by environmentalists seem to be too expensive from the economists' point of view. And the opposite - what industry and business want is often unacceptable by the green. This project tries to find the crossing point between, and it should be assessed by both sides.
We are almost 7 billion (mankind will pass this threshold at 2012), and except the 2 billion people that struggle every day for basics like water and food, the most of the rest want to live the movie version of the American way of life. Not to mention that we need 2 more planets like Earth to feed our consumer needs (greed?).
Every problem is an opportunity in disguise. This is a chance for us, not just for solving the current triple E3 (Environment-Energy-Economy) crisis, but to put international relations / co-operation into a new level.
I hope that this might be interesting for you from your perspective, and that the proposed measures could initiate a serious discussion.
Thank you for your time.
Looking forwards to hearing from you.
Sincerely,
Ivaylo Avramov
Bulgaria
P.S. Latest (seemingly unrelated) news about the Wilkins ice shelf breaking off from the Antarctic Peninsula, the concentration of economic interests (military presence) around both polar areas, and the insecurity of Food/Energy/other resources' prices, reminds us that we are running out of time.
Date : 11 juin 2009, 11:22
To all participants .
This year Hanoi is very hot , in June weather up to 37 oC and forecast to 45 oC .Never in my life the weather is ho tlike this , over body temperature .
In some places electricity is cut off .
Poor can't pay for using air -coordinator .
Children ill because of hot weather
Old persons complain about hot .
We don't know : what to to ? We put the green tree any where, where we can .This is good solution .
Thank you
Date : 10 avril 2009, 16:03
Financial crash, population crises, climate change. What sort of future?
Scenarios of disaster.
2009: a global financial crash.
* Banks and investment funds had gambled on 'bad investments', generating 'bad loans' or toxic assets - loans that would never be repaid.
*The loss of 33% of GDP, reduced value of global companies such as Toyota, General Motors, Honda, Ford, Panorama, Sony, General Electric.
*The bankruptcy of major banks and investment funds e.g. Lehman Brothers, American Insurance Group, Fannie Mae, Northern Rock, Halifax, Nationwide, Fortis, Royal Bank of Scotland. Bear Stearns.
*The bankruptcy of countries who borrowed too much on easy dollar credit e.g. Iceland, Ireland, Austria, Spain, Italy, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Serbia, the UK, Ukraine, Russia.
*Governments, local and national, have lost their investments in derivatives and swaps.
* Governments, local and national, have no access to credit, and are unable to generate the cash to run any services social, medical, transport.
*Millions of workers laid off and unemployment levels rising across the
world.
* The G8, the G20, the World Bank, the Central Banks, the IMF, all bailing out the world financial system so as to re-establish 'liquidity' to the tune of $15 trillion:
*the nationalizing of the debts/losses, but privatizing the profits.
* How long will the 'crash' last? 2010? 2020? 2030?
*Economists are predicting that we are witnessing system changes which may take ten to twenty years to work through. Nobody seems to know or are unwilling to say.
2009: One billion people starving out of 5.5 billion trying to survive on $10 a day.
* The world's population is 6.8 billion, of which 5.5 billion are trying to survive on less than $10 a day.
*The World Food Programme announced in Jan 2009 that over one billion people were starving.
*The World Health Organisation declares that up to 11 million children die in a year.
*Millions of adults and children in the developing world die of starvation, malnutrition, lack of water, lack of sanitation, disease.
* 20% of the world population will struggle to survive.
* This struggle will be made worse by the continuing high food prices, in the face of the expansion of industrial farming, in particular biofuels.
*During the crisis any cash that may have gone for 'aid and development', and the alleviation of the poor, has gone to the relief of the wealthy!
2009: Climate Change
*The publication of reports on Climate Change by various agencies revealed for the first time that climate warming is accelerating and is likely to do so for the foreseeable future, irrespective of what human communities do to control emission of pollutants!
* We have to accept that it is happening
for whatever reason!
*Ice in the Arctic Sea forms only in the winter, and Antarctica ice shelfs disappear. Already, the Wilkins ice shelf has broken away.
* Glaciers and snow fields in the mountains of the world are disappearing.
* Global sea levels are rising.
* The subtropical zones moving north and south, converting grasslands into deserts and making cattle rearing in central Africa and South America more difficult.
* Plants and animals, birds and insects moving north and south in greater numbers to find suitable environments, and diseases such as malaria become common place all over the world.
* Extreme weather events are more dramatic: the droughts across south China, Sept.2008; the forest fires in the southern Meditteranean 2008; and in New South Wales, and South Australia, Jan-Feb 2009; the cyclones in Queensland; the heavy rains and floods in the summer, in the UK, and in the winter in France and Spain; extensive snow storms across Canada and the US, Jan/Feb/March 2009.
2030: changes in the economic balance
* the 'developed world' is in recession, plagued by inflation.
* the countries who 'printed money' have currencies that are almost worthless.
* USA, UK, Europe, Japan: run nationalized banks, operating according to regulated objectives.
* Cash-rich countries, such as China, Saudi Arabia, Dubai, Syria, Jordan, Kuwait, the Emirates, Venezuela, Nigeria, Bolivia, have bought up major corporations in Europe and the USA.
* the economic balance has changed, and the so-called 'developed' world is dependent upon these 'cash economies'.
*China with its communist capitalism is the richest country in the world in opposition to India and the USA.
* China controls all the principal sources of minerals across the world.
* China, the principal communist government, controls the capitalist world! Victory for communism!
2030: Population
*the world's population is 7.5 billion.
* the climate changes have impacted on agriculture and led to starvation and death of up to 2 billion people.
* malnutrition, and disease causes death of up to 50 million children.
* more rigorous birth control measures in China and India; more programmes of birth control in Africa and South America.
* more and more people living in cities
.living in the slums, directly suffering from flooding, lack of sanitation, and water borne diseases, including the plague.
* USA, Japan, Europe, Russia have 60% elderly: and a decreasing working population.
* Young working populations are in Africa, and Asia, global migration.
* faced by lack of access to funds, many governments, of 'failed states' corruptly direct these monies to politicians and civil servants.
*the people dependent upon aid, fail: their businesses collapse; education/health projects stop.
2030: climate change
* up to 10C increase in global temperatures.
* the global atmosphere has more than 450 particles per million and there is increasing heat retention.
* rising sea levels have led to flooding, and extension of marshes and deltas; * migration of people from coastal areas across the globe;
* stagnation of rivers, and inland flooding leading to failure of sewage flows.
* most prosperous countries have developed water management systems, along with flood control barrages.
* the increasing temperatures have seen the spread of diseases such as bird flu, ebola, cholera, the plague, lyme disease, TB, yellow fever, sleeping sickness to most of the world, along with HIV and malaria.
* an increase in violent storms, leading to extensive damage to buildings, farms, forests.
see www.kelvynrichard.com: Social Ecology-a new morality
Do you want to offer other scenarios?
Date : 26 février 2009, 08:37
First of all, I'd like to extend my sincere appreciation to Mr. Kemal Dervis, for his thoughtful and prompt analysis of the current status regarding the Climate Change. Indeed, the world is finally gearing up toward the full recognition of the dire situation and its solution under the favorable atmosphere generating from the leadership of both the world parliament, the UN and the super power congress, the US. Taking due account of the COP 15 in Copenhagen, I firmly believe that the political momentum will surely be gathered once again that would more or less surpass the extent of Kyoto Protocol.
The major challenge and goal for all of us at stake here will rest on drawing the full participation as well as cooperation from the main culprits of the gas emissions around the world, some of them being the world's super powerhouses. This time, no budging or bungling should be allowed as an excuse for those concerned, as the world seems to be nearing the brink of the final bottom line day by day. The somber acknowledgement that no sustainable growth can be achieved at the cost of natural destruction must be widespread among the world leaders to alert their people to act with boldness and determination.
However, in regard to the pricing of the carbon, there's still a lingering doubt as to how much willing the metropole countries would be toward giving aids and hands to the most vulnerable victims of the environmental crisis. The ironic problem with the climate change is that its victims are expected to be not the protagonist but the bystanders who don't have any faults at all. Whereas the imminent danger posed upon those innocent sufferers are mounting day in day out, the continuing reluctance of the guilty industrialized nations will likely persist in years to come, especially in terms of monetary issues. As the core member of young generation who will have to bear the brunt of the consequences of this major crisis, I cannot but hopelessly pray that the day may come when those callous international leaders will finally wake up to the urgent calling across the planet.








