Recitation Exercise 7:

Threat of Global Warming: The Geopolitics of Cause and Mitigation, Blame and Responsibility

In this recitation exercise you will assess two elements of the global warming issues: (1) uncertainties in future greenhouse gas emissions and thus in the future load of greenhouse gases (especially carbon dioxide) in the atmosphere, and (2) the geo-political aspects of policies to reduce carbon dioxide build-up in the atmosphere and thus the risk of global warming. This is a demanding exercise that requires you to read technical reports on the web and draw your own conclusions. The material will be introduced in class and in recitation, and you have two weeks and Thanksgiving Break to work on this two-part exercise.

Part 1: The Uncertainties in Greenhouse Gas Projections

In this first part of this exercise you will discuss in recitation, and examine on your own or in groups outside the classroom, the latest set of greenhouse gas emissions scenarios (projections) created by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). These projections are all laid out in a very detailed report called the “Special report on Emissions Scenarios” (SRES) available at:

http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc/emission/index.htm

You will find everything you need from this web link, but you will also find that the material is quite thick, and demanding, so be sure to give it some time. The material will be introduced in class, in recitation, and you have two weeks and Thanksgiving Break to work on this two-part exercise.

As you read the SRES, you will immediately see that essentially all the scenarios show increasing uncertainty, or spread, through time. Depending on the underlying assumptions about economic growth and population, and some complex interactions between, say, agriculture and forestry.

Your mission is to identify sources of uncertainty in the projections, either in driving forces or interactions of factors.

Student name:___________________________

TA name:___________________________

Recitation Exercise 7, Part 1:

Part 1: The Uncertainties in Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Projections

Instructions: After you have discussed the SRES scenarios in recitation, take time to read/skim the “Summary for Policy Makers,” the “Technical Summary,” and at least skim Chaps. 2, 5 and 6, to develop pertinent answers to these five questions.

For 1-3 briefly describe uncertainties in the relationship that could increase or decrease GHG emissions over time:

1. The relationship between population and gross world product.

2. The relationship between gross World product and Energy Intensity.

3. The relationship between Energy Intensity and Carbon Intensity.

4. Give at least three distinct reasons that several of the projected GHG emissions decline after about 2050.

Part 2: The Geopolitics of Mitigation (Fixing the Problem)

As with other trans-boundary environmental problems, this one has led to an international agreement, the so-called “UN Framework Convention on Climate Change” and the “Kyoto Protocol,” in which the leading industrial nations of the world agree to limit their emissions according to targets and timetables that are designed at least to slow the build-up and resulting warming, and eventually stabilize atmospheric CO2. The Kyoto agreement contains provisions that recognize some important geographical (geo-political) elements of the problem: (a) the most developed countries are asked to cut emissions in the first round of actions because they have caused most of the problem in the first place, and can do so with less social harm; (b) there is an obvious need to bring developing countries into the agreement eventually, and technological solutions are to be made available in ways that recognize that developing countries may not have the wealth or expertise to implement energy efficiency.

Backgrounder:

You can read about Kyoto’s provisions at:

http://unfccc.int/2860.php

And, for a U.S.-centered perspective, see:

http://www.ncseonline.org/NLE/CRSreports/climate/clim-25.pdf

The main geopolitical issues include:

· Differential obligations to reduce emissions by the industrial countries (the Most developed Countries, or MDCs) compared to developing countries (the Least Developed Countries, or LDCs—often referred to as “the South” in the lingo of international development), based on the simple equity of those who caused most of the problem having the obligation to fix most of the problem.

· Arguments by LDCs for favorable terms of trade, and technology transfer from MDCs to LDCs in order to speed up their development of efficient industrial/energy systems; this is part of the LDCs have a “right to develop,” either by following the carbon-based path of the MDCs or by getting help to leapfrog to post-carbon energy systems. If they use similar energy paths as the MDCs, then as the economies of the developing countries grow, they will become big (maybe even larger) contributors in the future

· Arguments that the impacts of global warming will not be evenly distributed, and that less developed countries have more to lose (their resource-based economies are more sensitive to climate) and some are in more vulnerable settings (coastal zones like Bangladesh, island states). Also, they have fewer financial resources to devote to adapting to climate change.

· The debate in the U.S. as to whether emission limits would hurt our economy (see Bush press release: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/06/20010611-2.html) or whether (as the McCain-Lieberman climate bill killed in the Senate on October 30) a policy impetus for efficiency and alternative energy systems might actually put The U.S. in the technological lead.

· Arguments that countries that championed Kyoto and signed on fast (e.g., much of Western Europe) don’t really mean to fulfill their obligations.

For a look at International Emissions projections, see:

http://yosemite.epa.gov/OAR/globalwarming.nsf/content/EmissionsInternationalProjections.html

For a look at U.S. emissions, see:

http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/globalwarming.nsf/content/emissionsindividual.html

For maps of greenhouse gas emissions, see:

http://maps.grida.no/kyoto/

For an essay on the equity issues, see: http://www.ecoequity.org/ceo/ceo_6_1.htm

And see: http://pdf.wri.org/opc_chapter1.pdf

For the U.S. administration position, read President Bush’s views and his arguments for withdrawing (that is, not moving to ratify) from the Kyoto agreement:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/06/20010611-2.html

For a wide range of skeptical views of global warming and the Kyoto accord, see:

http://www.cato.org/current/global-warming/index.html

Student name:___________________________

TA name:___________________________

Recitation Exercise 7, Part 2:

The Geopolitics of Mitigation (Fixing the Problem)

Instructions: After you have discussed the international agreement on climate change in recitation, answer these four questions with short, pertinent answers. Give each question a YES or a NO, then explain briefly WHY.

5. Is an international treaty in which each signatory agrees to immediately start to limit greenhouse gas emissions the right response to the threat of global warming? Yes or No, and Why?

Now, recognizing that there is be an international treaty:

6. Should the LDCs be included in the early rounds of greenhouse gas emission reduction targets” Yes or No, and Why?

7. Should LDCs be given preferential terms of trade for technologies that allow them to develop along a less carbon-rich path? Yes or No, and Why?

8. Should vulnerability to climate change, including a country’s ability to adapt to global warming, be used as a factor in allocating limits on emissions and/or terms of development assistance? Yes or No, and Why?