Posted
on 08 June 2009 - Wellington, New Zealand:
Protecting valuable marine resources could
offset projected economic costs of climate
change, according to a new WWF report issued
today.
Future Seas is based
on two scenarios developed by a representative
group of fishers, scientists, energy experts,
community leaders, eco-tour operators, environmentalists,
and Mäori and government representatives.
The report examines
the long-term future of New Zealand’s marine
environment, which faces tremendous outside
pressure on its resources, including from
fishing and mineral extraction, competing
interests within the marine environment,
and pollution of marine habitats,
Researchers concluded
that New Zealand must take major steps to
protect the country’s marine resources from
the effects of climate change – steps that
also could be replicated in other countries.
In particular, they
highlighted the importance of marine reserves
and Marine Protected Area’s (MPAs) as economic
drivers to counteract the costs associated
with those changes.
A Marine Protected Area
is an official area of protection with boundaries
that encompass part of the ocean, and is
meant to shield marine resources, whether
environmental, historical, or cultural.
“The Selling by the
Litre” scenario plays out in a world where
climate change follows the most optimistic
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC) prognosis, in which people and the
environment gradually adapt to new climactic
conditions.
In contrast, the “Acting
Local” scenario is defined by the most pessimistic
IPCC climate change outcome. Environmental
change in this scenario is rapid and widespread.
“Both scenarios highlighted
that there is scope for much more extensive
activity in the seas and that access to
the ocean’s resources could generate economic
boom or recession,” according to the report.
“On the other hand, closer analysis of predicted
climate change impacts showed that many
marine species are likely to come under
severe stress in the next 50 years and the
stability of ecosystems is not guaranteed.”
The report’s authors
also said that marine reserves do not need
to detract from the potential value of the
marine economy.
Marine reserves can
enhance a number of non-extractive activities
and add value to activities undertaken outside
of reserves, for example by providing scientific
baseline information, enabling more informed
ocean exploration, or by conserving a pool
of genetic diversity which could improve
species health in other areas.
“In these two scenarios,
at least, the opportunity costs of the reserves
and costs of transformation were minimal
compared to the eventual benefits and the
costs of climate change,” the report states.
“In fact, they were more like an insurance
investment, which allowed the communities
to prepare themselves for the changes that
were inflicted by larger forces such as
climate change, intensification of the human
activity in the sea, or change of property
regime.”
+ More
More studies needed
for Amazon dams
Posted on 09 June 2009
- La Paz, Bolivia - An international group
of scientists has called for more studies
into the impacts of large hydro-energy projects
in the Amazon and other tropical regions.
La Paz, Bolivia - An
international group of scientists has called
for more studies into the impacts of large
hydro-energy projects in the Amazon and
other tropical regions.
The International Symposium
held in Bolivian government seat La Paz
looked at multiple studies, focusing on
the Madeira river watershed, to assess required
and prudent levels of environmental, social
and economic evaluation of tropical dam
projects.
“The main objective
of the studies supported by WWF is to contribute
to the fair and expected Bolivian Amazon
development to be reached in a sound manner,
especially considering enough elements not
to jeopardize the ecosystem and its use
irreversibly for future generations,” said
Marcela Añez, Infrastructure Officer
with WWF Bolivia.
The Madeira river is
the Amazon’s main tributary and supplies
the greatest quantity of water and sediments
to the river. Research presented at the
symposium showed that the Brazilian dams
of Jirau and Santo Antonio would cause hydraulic
and hydrological impacts in Bolivia, including
an increased risk of floods.
The symposium, attended
by scientists from Bolivia, Brazil, Ecuador,
Peru and France, also heard an estimated
that 80 percent of fish in the Bolivian
Amazon are migratory, and some of the species
with an important value from a commercial
and subsistence point of view could be affected.
“Within the possible
impacts are the gradual reduction in fishing,
which could affect at least 16,000 Bolivian
families whose livelihood depends on this
activity,” said Paul Van Damme, from the
FaunAgua Association.
Marc Pouilly, from IRD,
also warned that “there is considerable
data that is precise and which predicts
that floods will occur as a consequence
of the dams, which could affect the use
of natural resources and increase diseases
such as malaria, yellow and dengue fevers.
It is very important to carry out further
studies to estimate the extension of the
area of the Bolivian Amazon that could be
flooded, as well as the impacts in the dams’
nearby areas and downstream”.
Other impacts that have
been observed in dams that are constructed
in tropical areas is the increase in mercury
in fish (in the reservoir and mainly down
river), deforestation in the area along
the power lines, contamination with herbicides
to maintain these power lines, retention
of sediments and erosion on river banks,
according to Jean Remy Davée Guimaraes,
from the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro
(UFRJ).
In terms of socioeconomic
impacts, Manuel Antonio Valdés, from
the Rondonia Federal University (UNIR),
added that, in the case of Brazil, 65 percent
of the population that was visited in the
area of the Madeira river (close to 1,100
families) as part of the research will very
likely have the need to move, leaving behind
their animals, crops, customs and ways of
life in harmony with the river. Of these,
only 30 percent have land property titles,
which would make social compensation efforts
difficult.
The event was coordinated
by Jorge Molina of the Institute of Hydraulics
and Hydrology at Andrés University
(IHH/UMSA), the Institute for Research and
Development (IRD) and WWF, the global conservation
organization.
IHH, IRD and WWF have
been supporting research and dissemination
of technical information related to the
possible impacts that might occur in Bolivia
as a result of the construction of dams
on the Madeira river in Brazil, aiming to
provide input for stakeholders to be able
to influence decision makers, minimize negative
impacts and promote the development of sustainable
energy infrastructure in the Bolivian Amazon.
The scientists’ main concerns revolve around
the sensitivity of the northern Amazon in
Bolivia in regards to the dams, and the
need for improved evaluations.
+ More
Japan’s emissions target:
far too little, far too late
Posted on 10 June 2009
- Bonn, Germany - Japan’s announcement to
reduce its emissions by only 8 percent by
2020 completely lacks ambition and stands
in the way of a fair global deal, which
should save the world from the catastrophic
impact of climate change, WWF said.
Prime Minister Taro
Aso has been delaying the announcement of
his country’s midterm target, confusing
and holding up other countries which are
trying to set an overall goal for greenhouse
gas emissions of industrialized states.
What he offers now is
simply not enough and puts the world in
great danger, according to WWF.
“We have waited a long
time for Japan to finally inform the world
about its emissions plans; and today we
were presented something dangerously lacking
any level of ambition,” said Kim Carstensen,
the leader of WWF’s Climate Initiative.
“The Japanese target
translates to a reduction of only 2 percent
below what Japan committed to in the Kyoto
Protocol. This is a great shame, and it
sets the wrong tone for the negotiations
here in Bonn. Aso’s decision, influenced
by polluters rather than the public, makes
reaching a good deal even harder.”
In Bonn, delegates from
around the world are negotiating a treaty
to replace the commitments agreed to in
the Kyoto Protocol, which is expiring in
2012.
Japan’s government announced
its goal as a reduction of greenhouse gases
by 15 percent by 2020, but this would translate
into a drop of only 8 percent below 11000
levels and only 2 percent below Japan’s
Kyoto target for 2008-2012.
The country has used
2005 as its base year, rather than 11000,
which is the baseline year in the UN negotiations.
The reason why Japan is doing this is because
it has increased its emission by more than
7 percent instead of reducing it since 11000.
This hides the lack of real action in Japan
to implement the Kyoto Protocol
Scientists say industrialized
countries as a whole need to reduce the
emission by 25 to 40 percent compared to
11000 level by 2020, in order to prevent
the world from overheating to dangerous
levels, resulting in catastrophic impacts.
Japan argues that an
8 percent reduction would be ambitious given
that Japan’s economy is relatively energy
and carbon efficient. In WWF’s view, this
is not a strong argument.
“It is true that Japan’s
energy efficiency improved in the 1980s,
during the oil crisis. Unfortunately, since
11000 most of the sector’s energy efficiency
either stagnated or declined,” Carstensen
said.
Japan also seems to
believe that it’s 8 percent reduction target
is much more ambitious than the other industrialized
countries such as EU and the US, using cost
analysis as a sole indicator for comparable
effort.
WWF argues that the
effort sharing should be based on capacity
to act (with a criteria such as GDP/capita)
and responsibility (current and historic
emissions par capita) as well as cost analysis.
According to all these criteria, Japan should
contribute much more to the emission reduction
range required from industrialized countries.
In WWF ‘s view, Aso
should have listened to Japanese people’s
voice who favoured a more ambitious target,
such as a 25 percent reduction.
The poll conducted by
internationally renowned polling firm Greenberg
Quinlan Rosner in May revealed that 60 percent
Japanese favour a stronger target such as
-25% .
“Aso should change his
mind immediately and rise as a true leader
by setting more than 25 percent reduction
target towards the successful Copenhagen
deal."
+ More
Scientists find whales
more endangered in Exxon, BP and Rosneft
oil areas
Posted on 11 June 2009
- Gland, Switzerland – Oil and gas exploration
by energy giants Exxon, BP and Rosneft is
seriously threatening one of the world’s
most critically endangered whales, according
to a panel of top scientists in a new report.
Gland, Switzerland –
Oil and gas exploration by energy giants
Exxon, BP and Rosneft is seriously threatening
one of the world’s most critically endangered
whales, according to a panel of top scientists
in a new report.
The Western Gray Whale
Advisory Panel (WGWAP), composed of 11 scientists
and representatives from Shell and Sakahlin
Energy, met in April to discuss how oil
and gas development affect the whales’ main
annual feeding area off the northeastern
coast of Sakhalin Island, Russia.
The scientists found
that in 2008 there was a large decrease
in the number of whales in their annual
feeding area near the shore during a period
of loud industrial activity, including a
seismic survey. This is significant because
if the whales are displaced from this primary
annual feeding area, they will have less
success reproducing.
“Western gray whale
cows with their calves feed near the shore,
but the industrial noise resulting from
oil and gas development activities is pushing
them out of the area,” Doug Norlen from
Pacific Environment. “Any disturbance of
these critically endangered whales’ behavior
is particularly concerning as there are
only 130 of them left."
However, Exxon, BP and
Rosneft have refused to address their threats
to the Western Gray Whale and these oil
giants plan to carry out further activities
in 2009 including seismic testing, construction
and other loud activities that could displace
whales from their annual feeding area.
“The new information
presented at this meeting has heightened
rather than diminished the Panel’s concern
that whale distribution and behaviour may
have been seriously affected by industrial
activities – on land and offshore - in 2008,”
according to the panel’s report.
Meanwhile, 35,000 people
from across the world have signed on to
a petition calling on five major oil companies
including Exxon, BP and Rosneft to postpone
any new development work in the vicinity
of the Western Gray Whale feeding area this
summer, and to work with experts find adequate
measures to protect the critically endangered
population.
WWF is sending the petitions
to oil companies this week, urging them
to act immediately as the gray whales will
start to arrive at their summer feeding
area near Sakhalin in a couple of weeks.
“Tens of thousands of
people are calling on Exxon, BP and Rosneft
to immediately halt their potentially destructive
activities at Sakhalin Island this summer,
and these companies can either choose to
act responsibly or stay their course and
help push the western gray whale further
toward extinction,” said Aleksey Knizhnikov,
WWF Russia.
The panel reiterated
it call for a moratorium on all development
activities in the area this summer. Because
of those concerns, Sakhalin Energy - a partnership
between Shell, Gasprom and other sharholders
– agreed in April to cancel their proposed
2009 seismic activities in the whales’ feeding
area.
The Western Gray Whale
is one of the world’s most endangered whales,
with only 25-30 breeding females remaining.
Don’t break promises,
help the poorest fight climate change –
WWF tells G8 finance chiefs
Posted on 11 June 2009
- The G8 must stick to its past financial
commitments to help the world’s Least Developed
Countries (LDCs) address the disastrous
impacts of climate change, WWF said ahead
of a meeting of the group’s finance ministers.
The G8 must stick to
its past financial commitments to help the
world’s Least Developed Countries (LDCs)
address the disastrous impacts of climate
change, WWF said ahead of a meeting of the
group’s finance ministers.
Over the past few years
more than 40 of the least developed countries
have written national plans for their adaptation
to climate change but despite promises from
developed countries none of these plans
are being implemented.
The level of funding
needed is about US$ 2 billion but so far
less than 200 million have been paid in,
and none has actually paid out.
“Irreversible climate
change is already affecting people’s lives.
Promises made to the most vulnerable and
poorest must be kept,” Kim Carstensen, the
leader of WWF’s Climate Initiative said.
“The rich world has
to prove that its pledges to help were not
just empty words.”
Providing immediate
funding to Least Developed Countries is
important, but at the same time it is urgent
that the Finance Ministers acknowledge that
their long-term obligation is even bigger.
“The G8 meeting is the
perfect opportunity for finance ministers
to show that they have realized the gravity
of the climate challenge and the true potential
cost of global inaction against climate
change,” Carstensen said.
“Finance ministers need
to begin seeing things from a long-term
perspective, where serious action on climate
change is in fact the cheap way out. Inaction
will be far more expensive. Finance ministers
have to acknowledge their responsibility
and find ways to mobilize the resources
needed to stop the worst impacts of climate
change in the future.”
WWF believes developed
countries need to provide new and additional
financial resources for adaptation and mitigation
of at least US$ 150 billion per year, beyond
overseas development assistance commitments.
The meeting of G-8 finance ministers Friday
and Saturday in the southern Italian city
of Lecce will include officials from the
U.S., Japan, Germany, France, Britain, Italy,
Canada and Russia, and will set the agenda
for a meeting of G-8 national leaders in
July in L'Aquila outside Rome.
