詹妮弗•摩根 Jennifer Morgan
2007年6月13日 June 13, 2007
今年八国集团峰会的议程被针对气候变化的谈判所主宰，但是这次会议能够有助于产生出可持续发展所需的国际协议吗？詹妮弗•摩根进行了报道。
The agenda for this year’s G8 Summit was dominated by negotiations on climate change, but did the meeting help produce the international agreements needed for sustainable development? Jennifer Morgan reports.
"对于一个能源竞赛日益加剧的世界来说，为保持气候稳定而进行合作和投资调整将会越来越不可能了。"
"A world characterised by increasingly aggressive competition for energy resources will be less and less able to cooperate and make the investment shifts needed to preserve climate stability."
在今年八国集团峰会之前，没有什么问题比气候变化更主宰着政治议程和新闻报纸。有世界科学和经济界在政府间气候变化专门委员会第四次评估报告的结论做后盾，以及史无前例的公众支持，德国总理安吉拉·默克尔在2007年由德国担任八国集团峰会主席国和欧盟轮值主席期间，均把气候变化和能源安全作为核心议题。
这种关注非常及时：我们现在知道，应对不断增加的能源供应危机和气候变化挑战，均需要协力将能源基础设施向安全、清洁和多元化的能源服务供应转变。这要求用新的方式整合能源与气候变化政策，以便保证为私营部门提供持续和明确的投资信号，并且为提供明确的公共利益引导公共投资政策。
八国集团针对能源和气候安全争论的回应是意义深远的。对于一个能源竞赛日益加剧的世界来说，为保持气候稳定而进行合作和投资调整将会越来越不可能了。各国政府应该共同致力于减少总需求，实现其能源供给的多样化，大力发展可再生能源的相应增长，满足贫困人口的能源需求，而不是专注于寻找新的能源供给。
然而，对于能源安全、高价油气对所有国家（特别是发展中国家）的影响、国内自然资源限制和气候不稳定性，存在一种人为的割裂。这模糊了这些问题强烈的相互依赖性，减少了制订协调一致的政策的机会。
对于八国集团来说，明智的做法是，鉴于其成员的经济和政治力量，抓住这次机会投入讨论，向商界和决策层发出明确的政治信号：投资需要从以往传统的化石燃料向未来的高效、低碳能源体系转化。
此次德国八国集团峰会确实试图这么做，峰会提供了一张表明前进方向的“路线图”，提出国家层面和住房、交通、能源等亟待变革的关键部门的能效目标，同时确保可持续的生物燃料进入交通体系。这样一个明智的能源策略巩固了德国为主席国的八国集团峰会的一揽子气候政策，它提出启动2007年12月基于联合国气候变化框架公约和京都议定书的下一轮国际谈判，以及设定指导这些谈判的长期目标。这一目标贯彻了政府间气候变化专门委员会的成果，并应提供未来能源投资的标准。
气候科学确定，将气候变化限制在2摄氏度内应该成为政策制订者的标杆，以便减少无可挽回的毁灭性破坏的风险，尤其是在那些最贫困的国家。这门科学还提供了日益强有力的指导，以便用统一方式评估不同的风险。风险级别当然要依照社会和生态系统的复原力而有所变化，但面临减轻贫困状况的巨大挑战的国家和地区，却更大程度地承担着升温2度后果所造成的危险。由于这些国家在八国集团峰会上没有代表，八国发出如下明确的信号就显得尤为关键：所有最终决定都将由联合国作出，因为那里每个国家对自己的未来都有发言权。
采纳目标和时间表对于将投资转向低碳未来与气温升幅控制在2度以内是一致的。国际能源署估计，到2030年，将在能源基础设施业投资20万亿美元。这将为资金转投新的可持续、有效率的能源系统提供天赐良机。然而，为了保证这种转变，需要从政府最高层发出长期、响亮和合法的信号。欧盟在召开春季理事会会议时采纳了这个办法。该会议是德国在兼有两个主席国身份期间主持的第一次会议。
最终，他们同意，不管其它国家决定采取什么行动，欧洲的温室气体排放到2020年至少比1990年的水平减少20%。他们还同意，如果其它国家准备切实行动起来，那么欧盟就准备到2020年比1990年减排30%，对于那些工业化国家来说，则进行强制性深度减排。为了保证目标能够实现，国家元首们同意：如果可能的话，到2020年增效20%；使能源供应多元化，到2020年由可再生资源所发电量占总发电量的20%；到2020年，在所有的欧洲新电站里安装碳捕获和存储技术。为了增加可能性，一致达成了12个碳捕获和存储示范项目。
在欧盟层面上就能源和气候一揽子计划达成一致，为默克尔总理和欧洲国家元首们展示领导能力，并将这种方式带入八国集团峰会提供了舞台。八国集团峰会议程的制订正是为了应对能源和气候安全的双重挑战。通过将能源效率设定为优先讨论议题，八国集团峰会还准备与中国、印度、巴西、南非和墨西哥这几个所谓的“加5”国家就它们的优先考虑问题进行对话。德国比以前的任何主席国更多与加5国家进行正式接触，强调由于气候变化相互依存和国际化的特性，每人国家都休戚与共。
这个议程与北美国家存在较大差别。布什政府和加拿大的斯蒂芬·哈珀都拒绝了由德国提出的为避免升温2度而进一步减排的建议。在峰会之前，似乎双方都质疑是否应以联合国为主要论坛来达成协议。这一立场的核心是对将目标和时间表捆绑在一起的作法的根本性反对。布什政府强调的是自愿措施和长远科技，而哈珀政府最近发表的声明说，他们不准备继续努力实现京都议定书目标，这两个国家都在致力于将辩论拉回到过去。说得准确一点，就是在里约环发大会之前的1991年，当时类似的政府提出了“承诺与评议”机制。包括中国这样新兴经济体在内的许多国家政府都认识到了里约协议在解决气候变化问题上的根本性失败。像巴西、南非这样的国家认识到，如果继续照常发展，就无法实现自己的发展目标。亟需更加雄心勃勃的行动。
让这些国家认识到共同面对的困境以及需要一个共同、雄心勃勃的响应是8+5国家的一个完美任务，但这又是一个他们只能部分响应的任务。峰会的结论明确认为，未来2012年后的气候情势将在联合国的范围内进行磋商，并最终于2009年结束，这是向前迈出的很坚实的一步，远远超出许多人的意料。八国集国国家现在必须同心协力，以保障12月巴厘岛峰会达成这一成果。然而，这些结论并没有什么实质性内容。最终，针对减排或增效没有设定什么目标。尽管大家认识到，应该认真考虑到2050年推动全球至少减排一半，但却没有达成任何协议。压力肯定还会继续加大。
詹妮弗·摩根是E3G（第三代环保主义）气候变化项目的主任
No issue dominated the political agenda and the newspapers in the lead-up to this week’s Group of Eight (G8) Summit more than climate change. Backed up by the world scientific and economic community in the conclusions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report, and buttressed by unprecedented levels of public support, Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel has placed climate and energy security at the heart of both the 2007 German presidencies: the G8 and the European Union.
This attention is very timely: we now know that tackling the growing challenges of energy supply risks and climate change will require a concerted shift in energy infrastructure towards secure, clean and diverse energy-service provision. This will require new ways of integrating energy and climate-change policies, to ensure consistent and clear investment signals to the private sector and to direct public investment policy to deliver well-defined public benefits.
The implications of the G8 response to the energy and climate-security debate will be far-reaching. A world characterised by increasingly aggressive competition for energy resources will be less and less able to cooperate and make the investment shifts needed to preserve climate stability. Rather than concentrating on seeking new supplies of energy, governments should be working together to reduce aggregate demand and diversify their energy supply, focusing heavily on the scaling up of renewable energies and meeting the energy needs of the poor.
However, there has been an artificial separation of energy security, the impact of high oil and gas prices on all countries (especially developing economies), domestic natural resource constraints and climate volatility. This obscures the issues’ strong interdependencies and diminishes the opportunity to develop coherent, integrated strategies.
It would have made sense for the G8, due to its members’ economic and political power, to take this opportunity to step into the debate and send a clear political signal to the business and policy world that investment needs to shift away from the conventional fossil fuels of yesterday, and towards the highly-efficient, low-carbon energy system of tomorrow.
The German G8 Agenda did try to do this, by providing a “roadmap” for a way forward that proposes efficiency targets on a national level and in key sectors required for transformation, such as housing, transport and power, as well as ensuring that sustainable biofuels flow into transportation systems. Such a smart energy strategy underpins the climate package of the German G8 Presidency, which proposed the launch of the next round of international negotiations under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol in December 2007, and puts forward a long-term goal to guide those negotiations. This goal is informed by the findings of the IPCC and should provide a benchmark for future energy investment.
Climate science confirms that a two degree Celsius limit for climate change should be the guiding post for policy makers in order to reduce the risk of irreversible and catastrophic damage, especially in the poorest countries. This science also provides increasingly robust guidance on the different risks that should be assessed in an integrated manner. Risk levels will of course vary according to the resilience of the society and ecosystem, but countries and regions facing large challenges to alleviate poverty are at a much greater risk from the impacts that are associated with a two degrees rise. As these countries are not represented at the G8, it was vital that the G8 countries send a clear signal that all final decisions will be made in the UN, where every country can have a say about its future.
Adopting targets and timetables is essential to shifting the investment towards the low-carbon future that is consistent with staying below a two degree rise. The International Energy Agency estimates that US$20 trillion will be invested in energy infrastructure up to 2030. This offers a massive opportunity to steer funds into a new sustainable and efficient energy system. However, in order to ensure that shift, long, loud and legal signals are needed from the highest level of government. The European Union adopted this approach at its Spring Council meeting, the first major Summit of the dual German presidencies.
In the end, they agreed that European greenhouse gas emissions should be reduced at least 20% below 1990 levels by 2020, no matter what actions other countries decided upon, and that the EU was prepared to reduce emissions by 30% below 1990 levels by 2020 if other countries were to undertake serious actions, or in the case of industrialised countries, mandatory deep emissions reductions. To ensure that the target will be met, heads of state agreed to: increase efficiency by 20% by 2020; diversify energy supply so that 20% of primary energy generated is sourced from renewables by 2020; fit all new power plants in Europe with carbon capture and storage (CCS) by 2020, if possible. To improve the likelihood of that, 12 CCS demonstration projects were agreed upon.
By agreeing this energy and climate package on the EU level, the stage was set for Chancellor Merkel, and her European colleagues, to show leadership and bring this approach into the G8. The G8 agenda was formulated to respond to the dual challenges of energy and climate security. By prioritising energy efficiency, it also attempted to speak to the priorities of the so-called “+5 countries”: China, India, Brazil, South Africa and Mexico. The German Presidency has more formally engaged the +5 than any other country before it, highlighting the shared dilemma each country faces due to the interdependent, international nature of climate change.
This agenda is quite different than that of North America. Both the Bush Administration and Canada’s Stephen Harper have rejected the German proposals for a deep cut in emissions to avoid the two degree temperature rise. In the lead-up to the Summit, it seemed that both were also questioning whether the UN should be the main forum where an agreement should occur. At the heart of this position is a fundamental opposition to binding targets and timetables. With the Bush Administration focus on voluntary measures and long-term technology and the Harper government’s recent statement that they will no longer attempt to meet Kyoto targets, both these countries are working to steer the debate back into the past. To be precise, the year is 1991 – before the Rio Earth Summit – when similar governments were proposing “pledge and review” schemes. Many governments, including some of the emerging economies such as China, have understood the fundamental failures of the Rio agreements to address climate change. And Countries such as Brazil and South Africa understand that they cannot meet their own development goals if they continue with business-as-usual development. Much more ambitious action is required.
Moving to an understanding amongst these countries, of the shared dilemma they face and the demand for a common, ambitious response, is a perfect task for the G8+5, but one that they only partially responded to. The Summit conclusions clearly decided that the future post-2012 climate regime should be negotiated under the UN and finalised by 2009, which is a strong step forward and much more than many expected. The G8 countries must now work together to ensure that this is the outcome of the December Bali Summit. The conclusions, however, were much weaker on substance. In the end, no targets were included either for emissions reductions or efficiency improvements. While there was a recognition that at least halving global emissions by 2050 should be seriously considered moving forward, there was no agreement. The pressure must continue to mount.
Jennifer Morgan is the Climate and Energy Security Director for E3G (Third Generation Environmentalism)
发帖
雷达卡
提升卡
置顶卡
沉默卡
变色卡
抢沙发
千斤顶
显身卡
京公网安备 11010802022788号
