Had the world’s leaders decided to ensure that global warming would increase to 3 to 4 degrees Celsius, perhaps to 5 degrees Celsius, instead of the 1.5-to-20 degrees Celsius threshold (over preindustrial temperatures) that scientists believe earth can tolerate, they couldn’t have acted more purposively than they did at the Durban climate conference. If this sounds like a harsh judgement that radically differs from the official spin that Durban was a historic success, a victory for climate equity, and an Indian triumph, consider the following. 

Read more on what leading environmentalist Praful Desai has to say about Inclement at Durban 

The United States, with 4 per cent of the earth’s population, emits 25 per cent of the total global greenhouse gases.

In the recently-concluded 14-day intense climate negotiations in the South African port city of Durban, one can discover a sense of win-win smugness. Apart from the minor irritants like Canada walking out of the Kyoto Protocol, the major emitters were spared the expediency of urgent action and managed to reach to a state of consensual status-quo. An Australian senator has derided the UN summit in Durban as a victory for political spin trying to “disguise what is a case of climate failure.” Another predicted that it will be a “do-nothing decade for global action.”

The Durban Spin

 

India will not sign any legally binding global agreement for emissions reduction, as the country needs to eradicate poverty through economic growth, Environment Minister Jayanthi Natarajan said today.

“There is no question of signing a legally binding agreement at this point of our development. We need to make sure that our development does not suffer,” Natarajan said in Rajya Sabha.

India not to sign any legally binding pacts on emission cuts: Govt

Climate change poses the most serious threat to agriculture world over and to the food security, with countries like India facing the most unfavourable crop prospects, according to Chief Operating Officer of NutriPlus Knowledge Programme of ICRISAT Saikatdatta Mazumdar.

‘Climate change poses serious threat to food security’

The UPA government launched another salvo at BSP supremo Mayawati with the Union environment minister Jayanthi Natarajan writing to the Uttar Pradesh CM pointing out that industries were polluting select rivers in the state leading to contamination of groundwater in some regions.

Jayanthi Natarajan hauls up Mayawati for apathy towards rivers’ clean-up in UP

Durban will create climate apartheid, under which rich polluters evade responsibility, but underprivileged people suffer the worst effects of climate change for which they are least responsible, writes Praful Bidwai.

Climate meet: Why Durban was a disaster

Driven by its over-emphasis on evading a “legally binding” commitment, India signed on at Durban to a key agreement that has not even a pro forma reference to equity and sets aside differentiation explicitly.

Post-Durban, India has its task cut out 

The 17th Conference of Parties (COP) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was convened in Durban when the membership of this multilateral body faced two exceptional challenges. First, a critical component of the convention, the Kyoto Protocol, under which industrialized countries took binding commitments to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, is completing the first period of implementation at the end of next year. In the absence of any agreement among the UNFCCC members, the global community would have lost the first and only opportunity that it has had to address the scourge of global warming through a multilaterally negotiated process. The second was a stern message sent out by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the agency that provides assessments of the risks arising from the risk of climate change. In its special report on managing the risks of extreme events and disasters to advance climate change adaptation, IPCC warned that as the earth’s temperature rises, the likelihood of extreme weather conditions will also increase.

An uncertain climate after Durban 

London: At the start of the 20th century, inventors Thomas Alva Edison and Nikola Tesla clashed in the “war of the currents”. To highlight the dangers of his rival’s system, Edison even electrocuted an elephant. The animal died in vain; it was Tesla’s system and not Edison’s that took off. But today, helped by technological advances and the need to conserve energy, Edison may finally get his revenge.

Did Edison see it coming? Renewable energy may be his revenge