• by Marcela Valente (buenos aires)
• Friday, October 23, 2009
• Inter Press Service

Through nearly 5,000 different actions planned in 170 countries for Saturday, climate change activists will try to raise public awareness on the need for a new global climate treaty which would set an upper limit for atmospheric carbon dioxide that would effectively prevent environmental catastrophes.

In Bolivia, activists will climb to the summit of Chacaltaya, an 18,000 year-old glacier that completely melted away early this year due to global warming. Demonstrations will be held at the Zócalo, Mexico City's main square, and the Plaza de Mayo in front of the government building in Buenos Aires. And boats carrying banners will set out from the southern Argentine city of Ushuaia, to cross the Beagle Channel.

These are just a few of the 500 activities planned in the region for Saturday, declared International Day of Climate Action by its organisers.

The campaign, which has been endorsed by Rajendra Pachauri, chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), is called, simply, '350', for the parts per million (ppm) identified by scientists as the safe upper limit for carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere.

Atmospheric concentrations of CO2 — the main contributor to the greenhouse effect - are currently around 390 ppm, and are increasing by an estimated two ppm a year.

In 2007, the IPCC said atmospheric carbon dioxide should be stabilised at 450 ppm. But its chair now says that while he cannot officially endorse the ambitious target of 350 ppm, he does fully support it as an individual scientist.

Speaking with IPS, Pablo Astudillo of Ecuador, who is coordinating the campaign in Latin America, said 'the aim of this initiative is for public opinion to get governments to accept that the new climate change treaty must establish a maximum upper limit of 350 ppm.'

To that end, civil society organisations, local communities and individuals were invited to register, on the 350.org web site, events they were planning for Saturday to draw attention to solutions to the climate crisis and to insist on a 350 ppm target.

'IPCC scientists support this initiative because they admit that this is the maximum tolerable level for the atmosphere, in order to curb climate change,' said Astudillo.

Climatologists at the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) have also stated that a 350 ppm limit is necessary, to prevent environmental catastrophes.

According to NASA scientist James Hansen, the level should be even lower: 300 ppm. He said a limit of 350 ppm would merely curb the melting of ice in the Arctic circle, and that to restore the ice that has already disappeared, a limit of 300 ppm is needed.

As a result of global warming, the polar ice caps and glaciers are melting fast and the sea levels are rising, threatening the existence of small island states. Climate change is also bringing flooding and more frequent and intense storms and droughts, with the subsequent problems of hunger and an increase in the number of environmental refugees.

In December, at the 15th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP 15) in Copenhagen, the world's governments will seek agreement on a framework to succeed the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, which expires in 2012.

But observers point out that the negotiations on a new global climate treaty on cutting emissions are bogged down. 'The positions of the different countries are all over the map,' Astudillo lamented.

The only nations backing the 350 campaign - as blocs - were the Alliance of Small Island States and the Group of Least Developed Countries (LDCs), which represent a combined total of around 80 countries, he said.

The rest of the world's countries have a wide range of positions, none of which have attracted strong agreement, said Astudillo.

That became apparent at the September meeting in Bangkok, when the delegations failed to reach an agreement and decided to meet again in Barcelona in November. 'There is a draft document, but it is very broad, with too many bracketed items, which reflect the variety of positions,' he said.

That is the main difference, he said, with the talks that led up to the signing of the Kyoto Protocol in 1997. Back then, Washington raised reservations about emissions caps and in the end did not ratify the agreement. 'Now it's not that the United States is boycotting the agreement, but there are many divisions among the countries, and no consensus has been reached,' he said.

© Inter Press Service (2009) — All Rights Reserved. Original source: Inter Press Service

Where next?

Advertisement