New Study: Climate Reductions
How much should each country do?
New York, New York- Activists groups released a new report based on the latest IPCC science that shows how much each country should reduce its climate-changing causing emissions.

The report, based on science by the Stockholm Environment Institute and Ecoequity and developed by Friends of the Earth EWNI and Jubilee South Asia Pacific Movement for Debt and Development, has been converted into a website tool that shows how much climate pollution each country should cut in 2025 and 2030, as well as how much international finance it should transfer.

Climate Fairshares and the UN Climate Summit

"As leaders meet for the UN Climate Summit this is the first comprehensive proposal that scientifically shows what each country needs to do if we're to stop climate change - this is the test for the scale of what's announced here." Asad Rehman, Head of International Climate at Friends of the Earth EWNI said upon releasing the report.

"This latest analysis of the science shines a spotlight on how far many governments, particularly rich industrialised countries, are from what is required." Rehman said.

"The Peoples Climate Marches across the world have shown that there are clear demands for climate justice and justice means every country taking on a fair share of the effort, so those with more responsibility and wealth, like the United States, will need to do more." Lidy Nacpil, Director of Jubilee South Asia Pacific Movement on Debt and Development, who also helped prepare the site said.

"The site shows not just what the whole world has to do, but it also helps people answer the fundamental question of the UN climate talks: what should each country do?" Sivan Kartha, senior scientist at the Stockholm Environment Institute said.
Key Findings

The Climate Fairshares website shows that:
  • The UK would need to reduce emissions by 65%-75% on 1990 levels by 2025 and in addition would need to transfer up to 49 billion dollars as a fair contribution.
  • The US would need to cut emissions by 55%-65% on 1990 levels by 2025 but would have to transfer up to $634 billion to make a fair contribution.
  • China, given its population, wealth and limited historical responsibility, could be seen to have a fairshare that allows it to increase its emissions on today's level by about 40% by 2025, but if the world is to make the 1.5 C of warming guardrail then it needs to cut its emissions on today's levels by 25-45% percent. That difference could cost up to $497 billion - transfers which would need to be made via access to technology.
  • Philippines like many less industrialised countries would have a fair share of effort that should include increasing emissions (by 36-46% on 2013 levels) but will actually need to receive transfers to decrease emissions (by 27%) in order to stop climate change.
More information and about other countries can be found on the easy-to-use site at:www.climatefairshares.org

Further information and quotes on Climate Fairshares

Sivan Kartha, Senior Scientist at Stockholm Environment Institute:

"The latest IPCC science reports have made even clearer how little additional climate pollution the earth can tolerate before we're risking irreversible catastrophic climate change.

Based on those limits on climate pollution for the whole world, it is striking just how quickly emissions need to come down, across the world. It may be hard to do, but it's dramatically easier than surviving 2,3,4 degrees of warming.

The site shows not just what the whole world has to do, but it also helps people answer the fundamental question of the UN climate talks, what should each country do."

Lidy Nacpil, Jubilee South Asia Pacific Movement on Debt and Development:

"What movements in the South, in communities most impacted by the climate crisis are calling for is for everyone to take action to stop climate change but that those with more responsibility and those who are more wealthy should do more.

In the Philippines we know we have to take action and the analysis shows that on our own we can only increase our emissions by 40% or so by 2025, which is less than what is currently projected. We are struggling to stop the expansión of coal in order to meet that fairshare.

But the science also shows that the Philippines fairshare will not be enough, and to stop climate change we have to do more to reduce emissions than would be expected. We are demanding the transfer of resources in order to do that, estimated here to be up to 9 billion USD a year by 2030. We call this a part of the climate debt owed to us and it is needed if we are to confront climate change while still responding to the needs of people.

It´s not just a question of being fair. It´s about being realistic. To be realistic means if we want a hope of stopping climate change these transfers have to happen. These deep cuts have to happen. That´s the realistic demand from people facing the full brutal force of climate change.

Suggestions by institutes funded by developed countries that somehow smaller cuts or slow change is a realistic solution to climate change reveals they aren´t based in the science or in the needs and lives of billions in the global South.

Less action than what´s proposed here would be to reward the rich for their history of pollution and shift the cost to the poorest. It´s not realistic to expect them to pay that cost, therefore those types of so-called solutions will not actually solve climate change."

Asad ehman, Friends of the Earth EWNI

"What should each country do is an ethical question. It´s a moral question of how much effort should each nation do as part of the global transformation needed to stop climate change.

It´s a basic moral principle that those with more responsibility have to take more action, and also that those with more wealth contribute more ' it´s the basis of our tax and transfer system domestically.

The principles of historical responsibility and capacity, as well as allowing sustainable development for all, are embedded in the UN climate convention as well, so they are the bedrock of the approach.

What this analysis shows is that transformation needed to stop climate change is enormous, and will require a huge mobilisations of resources, but that we can do it, we´re still talking about less each year than was mobilised in a week to fight the bankers 2008 financial crisis.

We use basic statistics, how much each country emitted, and how much wealth it has, giving consideration of the needs of people living in poverty, and from that we can come up with what each country´s fair share would be.

The tool shows that for industrialised countries like the UK, our fair share means we need to cut our domestic emissions by 65% on today´s levels by 2015. But that´s not even half of our fairshare of effort if we´re to solve climate change globally. 

So in addition we need to transfer as much as 65 billion USD per year to get the transformation happening globally. That would be enough to deliver renewable energy for 65 million people and build almost 100 kilometres of clean public transport. These services need to be delivered, but they have to be done cleanly if we´re to avoid climate change."

Coal Vs Solar

Coal Vs Solar

Image by London Permaculture


The Climate Fairshares site currently displays information for 27 countries and more countries are added everyday. Any information on the site can be quoted and shared.

The Climate Fairshares site can be found at: www.climatefairshares.org
 
# # #
blog comments powered by Disqus