… so it’s likely Bush won’t pay any attention to their demand for a comprehensive binding agreement to deal with global warming:
Global businesses have called for a legally-binding and comprehensive international deal on climate change.
A binding agreement on emissions reductions would encourage business to invest in low-carbon technologies, a statement from 150 businesses said. […]
Nokia, Tesco, Lloyds TSB and Nike are among the 150 firms that made the call.
The signatories represent companies from Europe, the US, China and Australia.
Still, it’s nice to know not all business leaders have their heads in the sand when it comes to the issue of rapid, human generated climate change. And no matter what you think of the British royals, this is one issue for which Prince Charles has been a consistent and persistent spokesperson:
Action now will stop the worst effects of climate change and at a fraction of the cost of inaction, the Prince of Wales – whose Corporate Leaders Group on Climate Change led the statement – wrote in the Financial Times.
“What these signatory companies understand is that the effects of climate change are irreparable and permanent,” he wrote.
“If I have grandchildren one day, I could not bear it if they asked me: Why did you not do something when it was possible to make a difference?
“These business leaders have asked themselves that same question and have had the wisdom to recognise that we are doing this for those who come after us.”
Too bad the Bush administration will do its best in Bali next week to sabotage any binding legal framework. Bush has been slightly more vocal regarding the reality of global warming, but for all his rhetoric, he has never indicated he would support any treaty that placed hard and fast rules regulating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The official Bush administration position still asserts that any binding international agreements to address climate change are unnecessary and that we can and should rely on voluntary agreements by businesses and governments to achieve a reduction of GHG emissions. Indeed, Bush skipped all of the substantive talks at the last UN sponsored conference in September. Instead, at his own “global warming” conference held later that same month, this is what he had to say about what should be done to address global warming:
(cont.)
There is a natural greenhouse effect that contributes to warming. Greenhouse gases trap heat, and thus warm the earth because they prevent a significant proportion of infrared radiation from escaping into space. Concentration of greenhouse gases, especially CO2, have increased substantially since the beginning of the industrial revolution. And the National Academy of Sciences indicate that the increase is due in large part to human activity.
Yet, the Academy’s report tells us that we do not know how much effect natural fluctuations in climate may have had on warming. We do not know how much our climate could, or will change in the future. We do not know how fast change will occur, or even how some of our actions could impact it. […]
We recognize our responsibility and will meet it — at home, in our hemisphere, and in the world. My Cabinet-level working group on climate change is recommending a number of initial steps, and will continue to work on additional ideas. The working group proposes the United States help lead the way by advancing the science on climate change, advancing the technology to monitor and reduce greenhouse gases, and creating partnerships within our hemisphere and beyond to monitor and measure and mitigate emissions.
Today, I make our investment in science even greater. My administration will establish the U.S. Climate Change Research Initiative to study areas of uncertainty and identify priority areas where investments can make a difference.
I’m directing my Secretary of Commerce, working with other agencies, to set priorities for additional investments in climate change research, review such investments, and to improve coordination amongst federal agencies. We will fully fund high-priority areas for climate change science over the next five years. We’ll also provide resources to build climate observation systems in developing countries and encourage other developed nations to match our American commitment.
And we propose a joint venture with the EU, Japan and others to develop state-of-the-art climate modeling that will help us better understand the causes and impacts of climate change. America’s the leader in technology and innovation. We all believe technology offers great promise to significantly reduce emissions — especially carbon capture, storage and sequestration technologies. […]
I’ve asked my advisors [sic] to consider approaches to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, including those that tap the power of markets, help realize the promise of technology and ensure the widest-possible global participation. . . .
Our approach must be flexible to adjust to new information and take advantage of new technology. We must always act to ensure continued economic growth and prosperity for our citizens and for citizens throughout the world. We should pursue market-based incentives and spur technological innovation.
Shorter Bush: There’s a global warming problem, but we don’t know that much about it so we need more research to study it. And whatever we do, we should rely upon free market forces rather than any other approach that might hurt my pals in the oil business.
Quite a contrast from the 150 business leaders who endorsed this statement issued by the Corporate Leaders Group on Climate Change, the group supported and led by Prince Charles:
On 30th November 2007, the business leaders of 150 global companies published a communiqué to world leaders calling for a comprehensive, legally binding United Nations framework to tackle climate change.
The initiative represents an unprecedented coming together of the international business community and includes some of the biggest companies and brands from around the world, including the United States, Europe, Australia and China.
It has been led by The Prince of Wales’s UK and EU Corporate Leaders Groups on Climate Change, which are developed and run by the University of Cambridge Programme for Industry.
It is hoped that The Bali Communiqué will have a significant impact on the UN climate negotiations starting on December 3rd 2007 in Bali, Indonesia.
The Bali Communiqué calls for:
* a comprehensive, legally binding United Nations framework to tackle climate change
* emission reduction targets to be guided primarily by science
* those countries that have already industrialised to make the greatest effort
* world leaders to seize the window of opportunity and agree a work plan of negotiations to ensure an agreement can come into force post 2012 (when the existing Kyoto Protocol expires)
Here’s what Prince Charles wrote about this communique which was published in the Financial Times yesterday:
The signatories represent companies from Europe, the US, China and Australia. Their message is clear. They believe climate change is a reality, that continued economic growth depends on tackling it and that the costs of inaction are too great. They believe that rigorous targets must be set and be based on science and common sense, not on the demands of short-term competitiveness. They also believe that the industrialised countries will have to bear much greater cuts than developing nations and want the certainty of a binding framework so they can invest in new technologies and know that these will be good for business. […]
What these signatory companies understand is that the effects of climate change are irreparable and permanent. The floods, droughts, rising sea-levels, spread of disease and poverty will be with us for ever. It is why it will take a massive effort to tackle it and why so much responsibility rests on the governments in Bali. They meet in the knowledge that a broad spectrum of private sector interests is urging them on. This is critical because we must harness the power of all sectors, public and private. Of crucial importance is the role of big capital providers, such as pension funds and insurance companies, and their ability to direct their investments towards delivering a low carbon economy.
In short, these corporations realize that the future prosperity of their businesses requires addressing the problem of climate change immediately, because to fail to do so will only increase the costs to the global economy in the future. They are taking the long view, not the short term, “How high is the stock price today?” view of most corporations. They reject the Bush adminstration’s desire to push off taking any real action for the indefinite future until more research can be done, because they know that the research we have already completed and the evidence of the effects of unmitigated carbon emissions of which we are already aware are a sufficient cause for both serious alarm and immediate action. Unlike President Bush and the Republican party in general, they are not ignoring the information contained, and warnings set forth, in the IPCC’s most recent report, which clearly states the overwhelming consensus of climate researchers that global warming is real, that it is caused by human activity, and that immediate action is necessary to ameliorate potentially catastrophic consequences.
“With this final report, the scientists have done their job and explained that global warming is happening and we need to do something about it,” said Eben Burnham-Snyder, spokesman for the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming. “We have to stop hiding behind China, and China has to stop hiding behind us.”
But there’s no guarantee the hiding by the world’s two worst environmental offenders will in fact stop.
The IPCC is credited with mainstreaming the idea that climate change is a direct result of human activity — specifically by burning fossil fuels which release greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. The international panel wants world governments to initiate a process under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change that results in hard caps for emissions.
The IPCC hopes the report will frame the Bali meeting. A new international climate-change deal must be settled in time to ensure that action continues after 2012, when the current phase of the Kyoto Protocol ends. But China and the United States are unlikely to agree to a negotiating process with that goal.
“I have no reason to suspect that the Bush administration will support a real negotiating process in Bali,” said Elliot Diringer, director of international strategies at the Pew Center on Climate Change. “And as long as the U.S. takes that position, there is no reason for China or other developing countries to support emissions caps.”
Could one man, one President, have done any worse than George Bush to damage the world in which we live, and which our children and grandchildren will inherit? Sadly, I suspect the answer to that question will be the same today and in the future: No. No one. Let us hope and pray that the next leader of the United States takes steps to immediately reverse the course upon which Mr. Bush has set us, and push for the rapid elimination of carbon emissions by all countries. If he or she does not, we will have perhaps wasted our last chance to prevent a global catastrophe of monumental proportions. If we haven’t already, that is.
