The Importance Of Limiting Global Temperature Changes And COP21 Success

Why is it important to limit global temperature changes to below 2°C warming?

1. Why is it important to limit global temperature changes to below 2°C warming?

2. Is the COP21 in Paris considered a success or a failure? Explain your answer?

3.  Compare their INDCs with respect to: (i) commitments to reduce carbon emissions; (ii) forestry protection; (iii) energy footprint; and (iv) technological support?

4. In your opinion, do you think that these IDNCs will be effective in controlling climate change Why or why not?

The United Nation Framework Convention on Climate Change was constituted in Rio de Janerio in the year 1992 and was enforced in the year 1992 (1). It is an international environmental treaty which was discussed at the Earth summit. The main purpose of this agreement is to control the emission of the green house gases and reduce their presence in the atmosphere in order to prevent anthropogenic interference with climatic conditions. No limits or sanctions have been imposed on the countries through the treaty it rather establishes the way in which specified treaties and agreements should be discussed to set limits with respect o green house emissions. With respect to this the agreement strives to limit the change in global temperature below or to 2°C by the year 2100 (2).

1. This part of the paper discusses why it is important to limit the global change in temperature to below 2°C. The planet has already been subjected to rising temperatures, shifting patterns of rainfall and snowfall along with extreme climatic conditions such as cyclones, rainstorms and rising sea levels. The main reasons for such drastic changes in the climate are the presence of high volume of green house gases such as (Chlorofluorocarbon) CFC, Carbon Dioxide, Nitrous oxide and Methane. The level of these gases in the atmosphere has risen mainly due to the increased use of fossil fuels for the purpose of generating energy. The primary function of these gases is to prevent heat from escaping the atmosphere. The ozone layer present in the stratosphere prevents the ultra violet radiations from the sun from entering the troposphere and the stratosphere as it reflects them back into the space. Compounds such as Chlorofluorocarbons react with the ozone layer and destroys its molecules. The chlorine from CFC reacts with the sole oxygen atom of ozone gets converted to chlorine monoxide destroying the ozone layer. A single chlorine atom has a potential to destroy almost ten thousand molecules of Ozone according to Environmental Protection Agency.

Is the COP21 in Paris considered a success or a failure? Explain your answer?

Global warming is a phenomenon which is currently the most significant issue faced by the earth’s environment. It is a well known fact that only one fourth of the earth’s total area comprises of land and the rest is water. Water is also stored in the form of glaciers on earth. As the temperature of the earth is rising due to the green house effect the glaciers which are made up of ice are melting rapidly which is subsequently resulting in the rise of sea level throughout the globe as the water from the glaciers is deposited in the oceans. This rise in sea level is causing the costal land to get submerged reducing the amount of land available on earth. Many coastal areas have already drowned and many are on the verge of getting submerged.

According to many environmental scientists the worst effect of climate change can only be avoided if the average temperature of earth is prevented to rise an additional 2°C above the pre-industrial levels and 1.5 more than the current level (3). It had been previously observed by the scientist that this can be maintained if the green house gases are limited to 550 PPM. However A Scientific Symposium on Stabilization of Greenhouse Gases conference found that even at 550 PPM the limit of 2 would exceed. The conference provided that if the achievement of this level is failed it might have drastic effect on the earth’s environment leading to disease like Skin cancer and a major part of the earth’s total land being submerged under water along with drastic increase in climate uncertainties (4).

2. The COP 21 was an effort to supersede the failure provided by the Copenhagen conference six years ago. Prior to the COP 21 several environmentalist, individuals and campaigning organizations all over the world came to the streets in order to promote a sense of urgency and protest for the purpose of achieving the strongest possible agreement towards environment protection (6).  195 countries for the first time pledged to change their environmental policies in order to contribute positively towards environmental conditions. The main purpose of this agreement between the countries was to limit the rise in global temperature to below 2 C and to give extra effort to restrict the rise below 1.5 C. it has to be noted that presently the world is heading towards 1 C increase in global temperature and if not limited the number could increase drastically therefore limiting the number at 1.5 C would be a difficult target (7).

Compare their INDCs with respect to: (i) commitments to reduce carbon emissions; (ii) forestry protection; (iii) energy footprint; and (iv) technological support?

The agreement also aims to establish a balance between green house gases stored by forests and oceans along with the green house gases emitted by human beings with respect to the century’s second half. With respect to this a review mechanism in relation to the national contribution and that of green house gases emission is strived to be established. According to the agreement every country is required to provide an inventory in relation to their green house emissions for the purpose of measuring its engagement (8). The engagement is subjected to be reviewed every five years and the initial global stocktale would be assessed in the year 2020. The agreements provide the understanding needed by developed countries towards leading the emission reduction targets. They are also required to provide qualitative as well as quantitative information on this every two years. The agreement also appoints two high level champions for the purpose of acting on behalf of the COP president in order to intensify and facilitate action during the period of 2016-2120 (9).

The COP 21 is evidently not the last agreement with respect to climate change and is a mere beginning towards positive steps in relation to the future environmental protection journey. The targets have been set by it and the leaders of the worlds have agreed upon the fact that limiting the emissions with respect to green house gases is the key to success. Another positive result which has been seem after the COP 21 is that just after 24 hours of the conference the policies of the United Kingdom with respect to environment have been criticized and scrutinized by the politicians’ in order to provide for a better environment (10). Thus it can be evidently said that COP 21 has been a success towards environmental protection.

3. This part of the paper compares the Intended Nationally Determined Contributions” (INDC) of 3 countries belonging to ASEAN namely Singapore, Indonesia and Philippines. The INDCs of these countries have been submitted by them on July 3, September 24 and October 1 respectively.

	Singapore	Philippines	Indonesia
Commitments to reduce carbon emissions	36% as in 2005 by the year 2030	Plans to reduce carbon emission by 70% till the year 2030. Plans to substitute fossil fuels with alternative source of energy.	Plans to reduce 41% of carbon emission by the year 2030 with support from international funding
Forestry protection	Protection of coastline and converting forest to national parks	Changed several legislations and enacted new ones for the protection of forests	Coastline protection and stricter laws in relation to hunting
Energy footprint	Although it lacks alternative resources for energy it uses energy efficient resources to reduce emissions and maintain productivity	Alternative resources present but lacks proper framework requiring international funding.	Lack of funding in acting as hindrance towards use of alternative resources as infrastructure not available.
Technological support	Invest a significant amount of money domestically funded to develop technological support. The support helps to reduce emissions	Uses different software to areas the emission issue	Lack technological support and requires funding

Carbon reduction commitments

Singapore has promised via its INDC that it would reduce its carbon emission by 36% from the year 2005 by the year 2030. In 2005 the green house emission of Singapore per S$ was 0.176 kgCO2e/S$ and the project aims to make it 0.113 kgCO2e/S$ by the year 2030. The time frames which Singapore has chosen to implement its policies from 2021 to the end of 2030 (11). The target set by Singapore as stated in its INDC is the best as compared to the other two countries. This document provided by Singapore clearly sets a realistic objective in terms of emission per Singapore dollar which is lacking in the documents provided by the other two countries that are using percentage reduction to describe their objectives. The concept of emission per kg will not only make Singapore reduce its carbon emission but also maintain its productivity.

In your opinion, do you think that these IDNCs will be effective in controlling climate change Why or why not?

Philippines plans to reduce carbon emission by 70% till the year 2030 from the year 2000. The reduction is targeted to be achieved from the sectors of energy, transport, forestry, industry and waste sectors. However the limitation of emission would be subjected to the financial resources available to develop transport waste and industry sector along with introduction of capacity buildings in Philippines. The countries vulnerability of extreme climate and its capacity of implementing the regulation would also be a factor affecting the results (12). Comparing the document provided by Philippines with the other two countries it is evident that Singapore is doing better in terms of carbon emission and setting clear objective. However comparing the documents provided by Indonesia with Philippines it is clear that the target set by Philippines is better than that of Indonesia but the approach taken by both the countries are same.

The most significant issue before Indonesia is to address the people who are below the poverty line still the country aims to comply with the agreement and reduce its emission with respect to green house gases. The country aims to reduce 26% of its green house emission by the year 2020. The country claims that if internationals support is provided it can achieve 46% emission reduction by the year 2030 (13). The document provided by Indonesia clearly states that its main concern is poverty at present thus it is not doing as good as the other two countries in terms of carbon emission.

Forestry protection

Singapore strives to protect the bio diversity with respect to its forest. The country plans to promote greenery by modeling its cities in form of gardens. Tekong Island is one of the biggest forests in the country. The country has adopted a coastal protection and restoration program in order to protect the forest from sea erosion and rise of water level. Most of the forests in Singapore have been converted to national parks in order to ensure that human activity does not cause any deterioration to the forest ecosystem (11).Singapore has a well developed legal framework in relation to its wildlife as compared to the other two countries and thus the major problem it faces in relation to forest is from coastal erosions. Singapore has been able to identify this fact accurately and has made investment towards coastal protection according to its INDC.

Philippines has amended various laws for protecting its forests. The climate Change Act 2008 has been amended establishing a commission for climate change. It main job is to ensure that the wild life and forest are not exploited by human activities. The country realizes the importance of forests towards controlling green house effect and therefore along with preventing emissions it striving to enhance its forests. It has also enacted laws such as natural disaster risk reduction and management law which acts as guidelines in case forests are affected by natural disasters (12). Contrasting to the other two countries Philippines have made major amendments to the law relating to forestry. Philippines also like Singapore have been able to accurately identify their main problem which is illegal human activities and thus have made provisions to address it adequately.

Indonesia has a rich biodiversity with respect to its forest ecosystem but recent reports have suggested that there has been a reduction of its forest area over a decade. Indonesia strives to protect its forests by limiting hunting activities and making laws in relation to deforestation stricter. The country is vulnerable to extreme climatic conditions like Singapore and has invested in the protection of its coast line to subsequently protect the forests (14). Contrasting from the other two countries it is evident from the documents provided by Indonesia that they have not been able to address forest protection adequately. They face major issues both in terms of illegal human activities and extreme climate. Although Indonesia has taken similar steps to that of Singapore in this regard the execution is uncertain as the country clearly provides that it lacks funds through the document provided by it.

Energy footprint

Singapore faces disadvantage with respect to alternative energy as it a small island on flat land with inadequate geothermal resources and high winds. Thus it faces difficulties to generate hydro electricity, geothermal or wind power. Further the risk of including nuclear power as an alternative energy is much more than its benefits. However Singapore uses its energy efficient strategies towards manufacturing to reduce emissions and therefore it is found that Singapore only contributes 0.11  to global emission which providing 2.2% of the global trade. The country is heavily dependent on international supplies for energy and food securities (15). With respect to energy the document provided by Singapore is the strongest as compared to the other two countries. Even though its lacks resources towards alternative energy production it has significantly invested in development of strategies which are energy efficient and thus prevents emission. whereas the other two countries even though they have adequate resources to use alternative energy lack framework and need financial support as provided by their respective documents.

Philippines have means of using alternative energy for fuels such as hydro electricity and wind energy. However as Philippines lack proper framework to harvest such energies they would require considerable amount of investigation to be made in this sector.

Indonesia like Philippines also has availability of alternative energy production resources such as wind and water energy but they also lack proper infrastructure which can be attained through international investment (20)

Both Indonesia and Philippines in this respect has failed to set clear objectives which directly affect their ability to reduce carbon emission. The situation can only be improved if the countries get international support to improve their energy framework.

Technological support

The technological support available to Singapore has helped it to achieve low emission despite having no alternative resources to produce energy and while marinating its productivity and economical growth. Singapore further favorably ranks 113 out of 140 countries with respect to less carbon emission. Singapore includes a green growth strategy for the purpose of the promotion of low carbon trajectories along with promotion of innovative energy measures over those which have been deployed extensively (16). The country plans to technological advancement towards emissions and with respect to this has made significant investments for the purpose of promoting new innovations. All these investment although entailing social and economic opportunity cost would be domestically funded. Singapore with respect to technology also has provided the strongest INDC as compared to the other two countries. Philippines have made better development as compared to that of Indonesia and Indonesia is suffering from the same problem of finance abilities.

With respect to technological support Philippines uses 2006 IPCC software guidelines for the GHG inventory, land and agricultural use software for forestry, agriculture and land use, alternative planning for long range energy and multi criteria analysis (17).  These systems introduced by the country are although not a major step towards environment protection but provides the intent of the country to reduce emission and provide for an energy efficient system.

The most significant issue before Indonesia is to address the people who are below the poverty line still the country aims to comply with the agreement and reduce its emission with respect to green house gases. The country aims to reduce 26% of its green house emission by the year 2020. The country claims that if internationals support is provided it can achieve 46% emission reduction by the year 2030. Indonesia lacks technological support needed for the reduction of carbon emission similar to that of  Philippines and are also is in need of significant investment.  The country has not provided any details about the technological support and therefore the only reason for this must be the lack of international funding.

4. The INDCs provided by these country show adequate evidence that it would be successful with respect to reduction in climate changes.

Ozone layer is depleting and adding to the depletion of ozone layer is the green house gases present in the atmosphere. As the ozone layer gets depleted it ultra violet radiations which are every harmful enter the earth’s atmosphere resulting in the rise of temperature, the green house gases further traps the increased heat in the atmosphere just like in case of a green house where the glass prevents the heat from escaping. This effect known as the green house effect considerably affects the earth’s temperature leading to global warming (18).

The COP21 has set a few national commitments with respect to the environment which include reducing green house gases emission by 40% by the year 2030 s compared to 1990 an d a further 75% reduction by the year 2050. It aims to increase the price of carbon to 56 per ton in 2020 and 100 by the year 2030. It aims to elevate the share of renewable energy by 32% and decrease overall consumption of energy by 50% till the year 2050 (19).

All the countries have pledged to reduce its carbon emissions through their INDCs and thus complying with the commitments of COP21 and subsequently climate change reduction.

According to the intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change of the United Nation the global temperatures have already climbed over 0.88 C during the period of 1880-2016. This has evidently resulted in melting glaciers, falter in crop yields and ocean levels rise. The Alaska’s Pedersen Glacier has gone back by two kilometers as a result of the rising temperature as provided by the Geological survey of United States. It has also been warned by the United Nation that grain crop yields falls by 5 % for every 1 C increase in the global temperature. The last three decades have progressively been hotter than the other. The decade from 1983 to 2012 was the warmest period of 30 years observed in the last 15 centuries( 20)

It is clearly indicated in the INDC provided by the countries that they are taking adequate steps towards improving the protection with respect to the forest will will subsequently control high temperatures.

There have been arguments by a few countries that this limit should be brought down to 1.5 c and more strict impositions must be made on countries with respect to green house emissions. The issue is of grave concern for the planet and although 2 C looks quiet insignificant it is the number which would be the difference between earth and catastrophe. Thus it is of utmost significance to limit the global temperature rise to below 2 C.

The alternative energy used by the countries other than fossil fuels would help in reducing emissions and ultimately control temperature.

The COP21 includes a five year review of the targets of the countries which is legally binding along with their capability towards achieving their objective of low carbon emission. The commitment also includes contribution and engagement of the respective countries towards the agreement. The agreement provides for financial support by developed countries of $100 billion by the year 2020 for the support of actions by vulnerable and developed countries. The agreement also provides for improving the engagement in the program by civil societies.

Thus If proper funding is received by the countries they would be able to manage climate change effectively.

The COP21 strives to minimize and avoid the damages and losses associated with the ill effects of the change in climate which includes extreme conditions through the implementation of an effective early warning system.

The COP21 is subjected to a few drawbacks one of which is the lack of a proper mechanism to implement the targets identified by the agreement. However this agreement is an initial step towards taking serious steps for dealing with climate change along with making the world free from the addiction of fossil fuels. In relation to this the INDCs provided by the countries are also an initial step to control climate change and thus are successful.

Reference

Nordhaus WD. A question of balance: Weighing the options on global warming policies. Yale University Press; 2014 Oct 1.
Trenberth KE, Dai A, Van Der Schrier G, Jones PD, Barichivich J, Briffa KR, Sheffield J. Global warming and changes in drought. Nature Climate Change. 2014 Jan 1;4(1):17-22.
Peters GP, Andrew RM, Boden T, Canadell JG, Ciais P, Le Quéré C, Marland G, Raupach MR, Wilson C. The challenge to keep global warming below 2 C. Nature Climate Change. 2013 Jan 1;3(1):4-6.
Knutson T. Early 20th Century Global Warming.
Leiserowitz A, Maibach EW, Roser-Renouf C, Feinberg G, Howe P. Climate Change in the American Mind: Americans’ Global Warming Beliefs and Attitudes in April 2013.
Trenberth KE, Fasullo JT. An apparent hiatus in global warming?. Earth’s Future. 2013 Dec 1;1(1):19-32.
Fyfe, J.C., Gillett, N.P. and Zwiers, F.W., 2013. Overestimated global warming over the past 20 years. Nature Climate Change, 3(9), pp.767-769.
Hof A, den Elzen M, Admiraal A, Roelfsema M. Global and regional abatement costs of INDCs and of enhanced action to levels well below 2 C and 1.5 C.
Gu?tschow J, Jeffery L, Alexander R, Hare B, Schaeffer M, Rocha M, Höhne N, Fekete H, Van Breevoort P, Blok K. INDCs lower projected warming to 2.7 C: significant progress but sfill above 2 C. Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Climate Analytics, NewClimate Institute and Ecofys. Available at: https://climateanalytics. org/publications/2015/indcs-lowerprojected-warming-to-2-7-c-significant-progress-but-still-above-2oc [Accessed 10 November 2015]. 2015.
Hof A, van Soest H, van den Berg M, de Boer HS, den Elzen M, Harmsen M, Roelfsema M, van Vuuren D. Raising the ambition level of INDCs allows for a smoother energy transition. Assessment of the implications of INDCs for achieving the. 2015 Dec 2;2.
Richards M, Gregersen L, Kuntze V, Madsen S, Oldvig MB, Campbell BM, Vasileiou I. Agriculture’s prominence in the INDCs.
Baarsch F, Lissner T, Schleussner CF, Granadillos J, de Bruin K, Perrette M, Schaeffer M, Hare B. Impacts of low aggregate INDCs ambition: Research commissioned by Oxfam.
Ekwall A. Explaining INDCs.
Forsell N, Turkovska O, Gusti M, Obersteiner M, den Elzen M, Havlik P. Assessing the INDCs’ land use, land use change, and forest emission projections. Carbon Balance and Management. 2016 Dec 1;11(1):26.
Tracker CA. Tracking INDCs. Retrieved April. 2015;28:2015.
Hafner M, Arlasane Y, Cail S, Mistré M. Energy World in 2040: Understanding INDCs Perspectives and Challenges. InEnergy: Expectations and Uncertainty, 39th IAEE International Conference, Jun 19-22, 2016 2016 Jun 19. International Association for Energy Economics.
Höhne N, Ellermann C, Fekete H. Process guidance for Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs). London, United Kingdom: Ecofys. 2014.
Tracker CA. Emissions Gap–How close are INDCs to 2 and 1.5 C pathways?. News Release, September. 2015;2.
Bakkegaard RK, Bee S, Naswa P, Ngara T, Olhoff A, Sharma S, Desgain DD. Developing INDCs: a guidance note. UNEP DTU Partnership; 2015.
Ottinger R. Expanding COP21 INDCs to Include Non-National Contributions.