| Louisville Climate Action Network |
This page was
most recently
updated on
12 Dec 09.
most recently
updated on
12 Dec 09.
Reports from Copenhagen
| Thursday-Friday, 10-11 Dec 09 |
canceled. Still, a couple of draft proposals are circulating, one from the group led by
the small island states and another from the chair of one of the ad hoc working groups.
The primary divides continue, apparently, with the developing countries sticking to the
following positions:
about 100 (out of the participating 192).
George Soros has proposed—independent of this conference—that the developed
countries put about $150 Billion in funds that have been returned to them recently from
the International Monetary Fund (IMF) into the climate-change adaptation arena. No
indication that anyone is biting on his offered bait.
Side events included a discussion on aviation and a presentation by the US Commerce
Secretary.
Aviation's contribution to climate change is about 2% of global GHG emissions; it's
projected to rise to 3.5% by 2030. Aviation is a complex industry with many parts. As
an air pollution official, I participated in a EPA/FAA stakeholder process (in the 2000-
2002 time-frame) that primarily addressed aviation’s impacts on air quality. We made
no notable progress, but I did learn something about the industry and its concerns.
The path forward for emission reductions from aviation will involve cleaner fuels and
more efficient planes, engines and operations. The industry seems to prefer global
solutions rather than different approaches by different countries. Industry reps noted
support for an int'l cap-and-trade approach to their emissions.
They are very concerned the same fuel and/or emissions might be taxed multiple times
by differing jurisdictions. Some countries and groups here urge the imposition of a levy
on aviation (and marine) fuels with the revenues earmarked to support for adaptation
by developing countries. Industry reps also expressed concerned about the effects of
such a levy on developing countries if a price increase in fuel discouraged tourist travel
to those destinations.
(In Louisville, we have been fortunate in recent years to have a progressive aviation
framework. Officials at both the Regional Airport Authority and UPS have implemented
several progressive ways to benchmark emissions from their operations and to develop
meaningful plans to reduce them. APCD took a lead in helping to obtain federal funds
for UPS to test biofuels in its ground fleet. Certainly more can and should be done, but
there are good people with good attitudes at both RAA and UPS.
US Secretary of Commerce Locke also made strong statements about the opportunities
to create jobs and improve the US and global economies through strong pursuit of
cleaner energy. Among his remarks:
He also highlighted President Obama's commitment to phase out subsidies and other
incentives for fossil fuels, and his administration’s intention to eliminate financial
incentives that work against clean energy.
Frankly, after the last eight years, I'm not sure that I really believed such talk could or
would ever come out of the mouth of a US Commerce Secretary. It was almost surreal.
Great, but surreal. His closing words: "Our children will live with the legacy of our
inaction.” Good stuff.
Art Williams
the small island states and another from the chair of one of the ad hoc working groups.
The primary divides continue, apparently, with the developing countries sticking to the
following positions:
- Achieving the very ambitious IPCC reduction goal of about 40% by 2020, to limit
average global temperature rise to no more than 1.5° C - Substantial funding from developed countries to developing countries
- Specific commitments from key developing countries
about 100 (out of the participating 192).
George Soros has proposed—independent of this conference—that the developed
countries put about $150 Billion in funds that have been returned to them recently from
the International Monetary Fund (IMF) into the climate-change adaptation arena. No
indication that anyone is biting on his offered bait.
Side events included a discussion on aviation and a presentation by the US Commerce
Secretary.
Aviation's contribution to climate change is about 2% of global GHG emissions; it's
projected to rise to 3.5% by 2030. Aviation is a complex industry with many parts. As
an air pollution official, I participated in a EPA/FAA stakeholder process (in the 2000-
2002 time-frame) that primarily addressed aviation’s impacts on air quality. We made
no notable progress, but I did learn something about the industry and its concerns.
The path forward for emission reductions from aviation will involve cleaner fuels and
more efficient planes, engines and operations. The industry seems to prefer global
solutions rather than different approaches by different countries. Industry reps noted
support for an int'l cap-and-trade approach to their emissions.
They are very concerned the same fuel and/or emissions might be taxed multiple times
by differing jurisdictions. Some countries and groups here urge the imposition of a levy
on aviation (and marine) fuels with the revenues earmarked to support for adaptation
by developing countries. Industry reps also expressed concerned about the effects of
such a levy on developing countries if a price increase in fuel discouraged tourist travel
to those destinations.
(In Louisville, we have been fortunate in recent years to have a progressive aviation
framework. Officials at both the Regional Airport Authority and UPS have implemented
several progressive ways to benchmark emissions from their operations and to develop
meaningful plans to reduce them. APCD took a lead in helping to obtain federal funds
for UPS to test biofuels in its ground fleet. Certainly more can and should be done, but
there are good people with good attitudes at both RAA and UPS.
US Secretary of Commerce Locke also made strong statements about the opportunities
to create jobs and improve the US and global economies through strong pursuit of
cleaner energy. Among his remarks:
- Climate change demands unified global action.
- Countries have a moral obligation to act.
- If the seas keep rising, it is bad for business and bad for job creation and bad for
children and grandchildren. - Strong clean energy policies could spur the greatest economic development of
this century. - But we need the political will to grasp this opportunity. We need to rethink the
way we create and use energy. [My note: we can't actually create energy per
one of those laws of physics] - If we don't curb carbon, we imperil the planet.
- The job creation potential from clean energy policies is astounding.
He also highlighted President Obama's commitment to phase out subsidies and other
incentives for fossil fuels, and his administration’s intention to eliminate financial
incentives that work against clean energy.
Frankly, after the last eight years, I'm not sure that I really believed such talk could or
would ever come out of the mouth of a US Commerce Secretary. It was almost surreal.
Great, but surreal. His closing words: "Our children will live with the legacy of our
inaction.” Good stuff.
Art Williams
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |