What the Paris Climate Meeting Must Do
By THE EDITORIAL BOARD

In 1992, more than 150 nations agreed at a meeting in Rio de Janeiro to take steps to stabilize greenhouse gases at a level that would “prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system” — United Nations-speak for global warming.

Many follow-up meetings have been held since then, with little to show for them. Emissions of greenhouse gases have steadily risen, as have atmospheric temperatures, while the consequences of unchecked warming — persistent droughts, melting glaciers and ice caps, dying corals, a slow but inexorable sea level rise — have become ever more pronounced.

On Monday, in Paris, the signatories to the Rio treaty (now 196), will try once again to fashion an international climate change agreement that might actually slow, then reduce, emissions and prevent the world from tipping over into full-scale catastrophe late in this century. As with other climate meetings, notably Kyoto in 1997 and Copenhagen in 2009, Paris is being advertised as a watershed event — “our last hope,” in the words of Fatih Birol, the new director of the International Energy Agency. As President François Hollande of France put it recently, “We are duty-bound to succeed.”

Paris will almost certainly not produce an ironclad, planet-saving agreement in two weeks. But it can succeed in an important way that earlier meetings have not — by fostering collective responsibility, a strong sense among countries large and small, rich and poor, that all must play a part in finding a global solution to a global problem.

Kyoto failed because it imposed emissions reduction targets only on developed countries, giving developing nations like China, India and Brazil a free pass. That doomed it in the United States Senate. Copenhagen attracted wider participation, but it broke up in disarray, in part because of continuing frictions between the industrialized nations and the developing countries.

The organizers of the Paris conference have learned a lot from past mistakes. Instead of pursuing a top-down agreement with mandated targets, they have asked every country to submit a national plan that lays out how and by how much they plan to reduce emissions in the years ahead. So far, more than 170 countries, accounting for over 90 percent of global greenhouse emissions, have submitted pledges, and more may emerge in Paris.

Will these pledges be enough to ward off the worst consequences of global warming? No. Scientists generally agree that global warming must not exceed 2 degrees Celsius, or 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit, from preindustrial levels. Various studies say that even if countries that have made pledges were to follow through on them, the world will heat up by 6.3 degrees Fahrenheit by the end of this century. That would still be much too high, and it would be guaranteed to make life miserable for future generations, especially in poor low-lying countries. But it would at least put the world on a safer trajectory; under most business-as-usual models, temperature increases could reach 8.1 degrees or higher.

Continue reading the main story Write A Comment

Eventually, of course, all nations will have to improve on their pledges, especially big emitters like China, India and the United States. If the Paris meeting is to be a genuine turning point, negotiators must make sure that the national pledges are the floor, not the ceiling of ambition, by establishing a framework requiring stronger climate commitments at regular intervals — say, every five years. This should be accompanied by a plan for monitoring and reporting each country’s performance. Earlier meetings have done poorly on this score.

Other important items dot the agenda. One is how rich nations can help poorer ones achieve their targets. Another is stopping the destruction of tropical forests, which play a huge role in storing carbon and absorbing emissions. The meeting also seeks to enlist investors, corporations, states and cities in the cause. Michael Bloomberg, who made reducing emissions a priority as mayor of New York, will join the mayor of Paris in co-hosting a gathering of local officials from around the world.

The test of success for this much-anticipated summit meeting is whether it produces not only stronger commitments but also a shared sense of urgency at all levels to meet them.

巴黎峰會 緩解暖化分水嶺？

這次巴黎氣候峰會跟以前的氣候峰會最大的不同，就是已開發和開發中國家都參與，而且不像以往由上而下決定各國必須達成的減少溫室氣體排放量目標，改由各國自行提出，因此被看好有希望達成協議採取實質行動減排。

紐約時報社論指出，1992年，150多個國家在巴西里約熱內盧開會，同意控制溫室氣體排放量，後來國際社會又開了許多氣候會議，規模最大的包括1997年的日本京都與2009年的丹麥哥本哈根峰會，但全球溫室氣體排放量仍持續增加，大氣溫度逐步上升，暖化引起的長期乾旱、冰河與冰帽融化、珊瑚死亡、海平面升高也日益嚴重。許多人不禁懷疑，這次的巴黎峰會究竟有什麼不同？

紐時指出，出席巴黎峰會的各國幾乎不可能在短短兩周內，就談出完美無缺且能讓大氣不再升溫的協議，不過，巴黎峰會將能做到以往峰會做不到的事：提高全球各國對解決暖化問題的責任感。

京都峰會只要求已開發國家減排，沒要求開發中國家如中國大陸、印度和巴西，2001年世界最大的溫室氣體排放國美國聯邦參議院以此為由，拒絕批准「京都議定書」，當時美國總統布希隨即退出議定書，京都峰會失敗。而哥本哈根峰會雖然有更多國家參與，卻在混亂中結束，部分原因是已開發與開發中國家爭吵不斷。

巴黎峰會主辦單位記取教訓，捨棄由上而下制定減排義務，轉而要求每個國家自行提出未來幾年減排的方式與目標。目前已有170多國提出計畫，這些國家溫室氣體排放量占全球九成以上，預計在巴黎峰會開始後會有更多國家提出。

人類雖然無法靠著這些減排計畫，避開全球暖化最惡劣的結果，但如果沒有這些計畫，後果會更嚴重。科學家普遍同意，全球大氣溫度不能比工業革命前增加超過攝氏兩度，但根據研究，即使各國都落實自己的減排目標，全球溫度在本世紀末仍會增加攝氏3.5度，但如果不設目標，全球溫度將增加攝氏4.5度。

各界還期待這次峰會能就這些各國自行提出的目標，制定一套檢討並監督執行進度的計畫，這是過去歷次氣候峰會欠缺的。另外，日本等富裕國家已陸續宣示將提供巨額資金協助較窮國家達成減排目標。這些宣示若能化為實際行動，巴黎峰會將成為緩解氣候暖化問題的分水嶺。

原文參照：
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/29/opinion/sunday/what-the-paris-climate-meeting-must-do.html

2015-11-30．聯合報．A2．焦點．編譯李京倫