Read Zoe Caron interview with Michael Martin, Canada’s Ambassador for Climate Change and head UN negotiator at the Bonn II climate talks.

According to Oxfam, developing countries, who face catastrophe if climate change is not held in check, are demanding rich nations cut their emissions by at least 40 percent on 1990 levels by 2020. Small island states and many least developed countries are pushing for a 45 percent cut in emissions on 1990 levels by 2020.

Why are cuts to emissions vital?

3 Million More deaths at the current rate of progress? Surely that’s a crime against humanity

Antonio Hill, Oxfam’s Senior Policy Advisor said, “Rich countries need to remember what is at stake in these negotiations. Many of the poor countries here today are already struggling to cope with impacts of a climate crisis they did not create. They are fighting for their survival.”

Rich country commitments, unchanged at Bonn, add up to a cut in emissions of between 4 and 14 percent on 1990 levels by 2020. The 2.8 – 4 degree temperature rise which would result, could lead to an additional 3 million more deaths from hunger and malnutrition and water shortages affecting up to 4 billion additional people.

When impacts like these are tallied and blame is cast, how would Canada fare in front of the court of world opinion with its current emissions targets?

Call for emissions cut by at least 40 per cent on 1990 levels by 2020 for Developing Nations

The G77 group of developing countries, including China, have put forward a proposal for rich industrialized countries to cut their emissions by at least 40 per cent on 1990 levels by 2020. Saudi Arabia and other oil producing states have split with the group over fears that a decline in demand for oil will affect their economy. South Africa, supported by most G77 countries, has tabled a proposal for allocating emissions reductions based on the level of cuts the science says is needed according to principles of responsibility (a country’s current and historical per capita emissions) and capability (a country’s ability to make emissions reductions based on its wealth). This model concludes that the US should cut its emissions by 52 percent from 1990 levels by 2022; Germany by 54 per cent; Australia by 49 percent; UK by 75 per cent and Canada by 47 percent. The Philippines has tabled a similar proposal, which envisages even greater emissions reductions.

Canada’s commitment: a 24 percent increase in total emissions by 2020

The European Union, which has one of the most ambitious targets of rich (Annex 1) countries, has committed to emissions reductions of 30 percent on 1990 levels by 2020 if other industrialised countries follow suit. Canada’s commitment equates to a 24 percent increase in total emissions by 2020, while the US is talking about a 0 percent increase.

A paper from Nick Mabey at environmental thinktank E3G says:

‘In order to prevent catastrophic climate change, global carbon emissions need to peak by 2015 and then reduce by 5% per year. This is a radical change from business-as-usual, which foresees emissions rising at 2-3% per year. Put simply, the world needs to move to a virtually zero carbon energy system by 2050, and in developed countries well before this.’ [John Ashton, the UK Climate Czar, said at a Nick Stern lecture last week that ‘by 2050 we will need to have a zero emission economy, with the exception of land use.’]

Where is Canada’s Low Carbon Stimulus

Other countries boldly embrace low carbon economic stimulus programs. Not Canada. An economic stimulus package is about more than fixing a problem; it is about seizing the opportunity to shape our collective future as a country and be a part of the reshaping of the global economy.

More from Nick Mabey:

South Korea has dedicated 80% of its stimulus spending on low carbon investments. China also ranks highly (37%), dedicating around $200bn to low carbon investments – although a substantial amount of this is committed to rail and grid infrastructure with uncertain climate benefits. Amongst developed countries only the US, France and Germany have allocated over 10% of their stimulus to low carbon investment.’

Obama says:

President Obama in Prague:

“Together we must confront climate change by ending the world’s dependency on fossil fuels by tapping the power from the sources of energy like the wind and the sun and calling upon all nations to do their part. And I pledge to you that in this global effort the US is now ready to lead.”

Will Canada follow?

Canadians are currently shaping up to be the least cooperative nation when it comes to emissions targets. Carbon economies will eventually pay a heavy price in economic, political and legal terms for inaction on climate change. What will Canada’s excuse be, if called to account for climate crimes against humanity?

Links:

• What’s next on Climate Change – from Poverty to Power
• Action needed to close the rich / poor divide – Oxfam