Japan is only the latest of a string of major economies, the US, Canada, Russia, China and Australia to name a few who have decided that measures to contain climate change are too costly. Come again, how can a measure be too costly if the alternative is a drastic change in life as we know it?
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Japan under fire for scaling back plans to cut greenhouse gases
UN climate talks in Warsaw face setback as U-turn on emissions angers developing countries in shadow of typhoon Haiyan.
Naderev Sano, the
Philippines negotiator at the UN climate talks in Warsaw, Poland, has
begun a fast to protest against inaction on global warming, which he
blames for typhoon Haiyan. Photograph: AP
The UN climate talks in Warsaw, Poland, were faced with a new crisis on Friday, after Japan, the world's fifth largest greenhouse gas emitter, slashed its plans to reduce emissions from 25% to just 3.8% on 2005 figures.
The move was immediately criticised as "irresponsible" and "unambitious" by developing countries and climate groups at the talks.
In a statement, the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), a group of 44 low-lying island and coastal nations that are the most vulnerable to the effects of climate change, said: "[We] are extremely concerned that the announcement represents a huge step backwards in the global effort to hold warming below the essential 1.5-2 degrees celsius threshold, and puts our populations at great risk.
"This is neither the time nor the place to be backtracking on commitments. Developed countries have committed to taking the lead and must do so as we work to peak global emissions this decade and ink a new global agreement in 2015.
"We are also aware that the crisis now unfolding in the Philippines in the wake of typhoon Haiyan, which has also caused significant damage for our members in Palau and the Federated States of Micronesia, is just the latest in a series of climate-related extreme weather catastrophes."
Britain's energy and climate change secretary, Ed Davey, called the decision "deeply disappointing" and at odds with the need to tackle global warming.
He was still hopeful that the UK and other members of the G8 leading economies could encourage Tokyo to change its mind.
"It is deeply disappointing that the Japanese government has taken this decision to significantly revise down its 2020 emissions target. This announcement runs counter to the broader political commitment to tackle climate change, recently reaffirmed by G8, as well as the enhanced ambition we have seen from the world's major emitters," he argued in unusually robust terms.
"Yet I believe we can persuade Japan to change her mind again, to resume her leadership role in the world on climate change. Despite the challenges, if the public backs the government it can invest in low carbon electricity," he added.
However, Christiana Figueres, UNFCCC exective secretary, said she "understood" the problems that Japan faced following the 2011 earthquake and tsunami, which had forced the country to close 50 nuclear power plants.
"I do have some understanding that Japan has been hit by several catstrophes in the past few years. My hope is that Japan understands that investment in renewable energies galvanises investments and creates new jobs," Figueres said.
"This move by Japan could have a devastating impact on the tone of discussion here in Warsaw," said Naoyuki Yamagishi, WWF Japan's climate ands enrgy group leader at the talks. "This decision is a gross negligence of its responsibility and should be revised in line with the level that science and justice requires."
As compensation, Japan said that its public and private sectors intended to raise $16bn (£9.9bn) by 2015 to help developing countries reduce their emissions, with the intention of helping others to reduce the emissions that it could not.
The aid package is thought to include supplying developing countries with "green" technologies developed by Japanese firms, including offshore wind turbines, fuel-cell vehicles and high-tech housing insulation. No figures were given on the scale of the emission cuts that the package might achieve.
"The new target is based on zero nuclear power in the future. We have to lower our ambition level," said Hiroshi Minami, Japan's chief negotiator.
The talks in Poland, at which 190 countries are meeting to try to agree additional action to put the world on course to avoid dangerous climate change, have been overshadowed by typhoon Haiyan, which has increased the determination of developing countries to negotiate compensation for climate damage done in the past.
The Japanese announcement follows open criticism by Australia and Canada of policies aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions in their countries, and reluctance from the US and Europe to aim for more ambitious emissions cuts.
Oxfam's climate change spokesperson, Kelly Dent, said: "Japan's dramatic U-turn on its emissions target commitments is a slap in the face for poor countries who are right now struggling to cope with changes to their climate, and who will face yet more extreme and unpredictable weather in the future."
She added: "As one of the world's largest Co2 emitters, Japan has a responsibility to help lead the world in reducing emissions to ensure temperatures are kept at a safe level below 1.5 degrees celsius. Instead, their actions may well further erode trust in current negotiations which must deliver a global climate deal in 2015."
It’s disappointing to see Japan take a major step back from their previous pledge to slash greenhouse gas emissions. The main reason for this is because of the shutdown of its nuclear power plants after the Fukushima nuclear disaster. The Fukushima nuclear incident was caused by the earthquake and tsunami of 2011. Christiana Figueres, UNFCCC executive secretary, says she “understood” Japan’s decision following the disastrous effects of the nuclear accident. Obviously following this incident, Japan needed to make new goals regarding nuclear power plants, but it’s still very disappointing to see a country that releases a massive amount of greenhouse gases go back on their original plans. Japan needs to define and settle upon what sources of energy it uses in the future. A lot of critics towards Japan are saying that reducing emissions and keeping the country’s reactors offline were not mutually exclusive, which I agree with, as well. Japan can reduce reliance on nuclear power if it aggressively pursued renewable energy. This decision is a major setback from Japan in the fight against global warming and this may lead to more severe and frequent typhoons and other weather events with the release of more emissions.
ReplyDeleteJane Han
This news highlights how affected people are the psychological bias of the present moment. The leaders are making a call to ease the macro environment for their people in the contemporary and neglecting the need for longer term solutions. The events of the nuclear plant Fukushima and its aftermath is a man made calamity that will affect generations to come. The problems have now spread father than the borders of Japan contaminating multiple sovereign nations. Japan needs to make serious decisions about how it is going to power its future generations without risking the only planet we have. They do no have the right to gamble with other people's human rights when deciding how they are going to light the bright lights of Tokyo. There is a finite supply of resources and the sooner we all realize that, the easier it will be able to make the sacrifices of consumption we need to make to sustain our home, earth.
ReplyDeleteThis is very unfortunate news to hear if you are an environmental activist. It seems that Japan is not willing to give up its currently booming economy to help preserve the Earth for the future. In essence we as a race are taking a step back on this issue instead of taking it head on and resolving the issue. Japan needs to reconsider its decision to slash its 2020 goal and continue to invest in renewable greener energy sources. I agree with the Oxfam’s climate change spokesperson, Kelly Dent, she said “ Japan’s dramatic U-turn on its emissions target commitments is a slap in the face for poor countries who are right now struggling to cope with changes to their climate and who will face yet more extreme nada unpredictable weather in the future.” This weather could continue to do more damage than Typhoon Haiyan, which puts them in great danger. I do not feel however that all of the blame is on Japan in this scenario. The U.S. is also reluctant to improve its urgency and goals on global warming. We believe that we can have our cake and eat it too. This is the wrong approach especially if we are trying to make this earth more sustainable for the future. To me, I believe that the U.S. should lead by example and show the developing countries how to go about solving this crisis with smart technology that allows us to utilize the earth’s natural renewable resources. Our main goals should be to focus on hydro and solar and steer away from coal and natural gas. I understand why the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) is so upset with Japan’s decision because ultimately they are going to be the ones to suffer the most from this decision. They should feel very disappointed it’s as if someone they look up to betrayed them for their own good. We need to fix this situation as a whole, not just Japan although that would be a start. The U.S. needs to jump on board as well as China and lead the way so that the small developing countries to not get swallowed and consumed by these awful destructive storms. I hope that the talks in Warsaw focus on the damage that the typhoon did to the Philippines and stress that it was most definitely the result of the earth warming. We do not what another super storm Sandy in the U.S., therefore we must sacrifice some luxuries so that the future will not have to fend of life threatening storms any more frequently than at the rate we are today. The human race must realize that this could ultimately cease are existence as a species if it is not dealt with in a timely efficient manner. The world as a whole must make this issue a priority, I am much less worried about healthcare than the future of this earth and the people who live to see it.
ReplyDeleteNicholas Brodeur
Pace Pleasantville
Though this is a major setback, I believe we have to look at all sides before passing judgement of Japan. On one side yes Japan is the fifth largest country with the highest greenhouse emission, but the've also been impacting by global warming and will most likely be effected in the future. I do admire that while still trying to recover their economy that they are still willing to donate money to other countries to make up for the reduce emission that they could not. I also think countries like Japan, Europe, and US use lack of funds as an excuse. If with put less money into war, army, and weaponry that there would be more money for things that matter. I just hope no other country backs out of promises made at the summit.
ReplyDeleteIts unfortunate to hear of developed countries like that of Japan to start to give up on reducing thier co2 emissions. Although the country has been riddled by natural disaster which led to a terrible sequence of events surrounding Hiroshima Nuclear power plant . Countries like Japan should not give up on this relatively very clean way to produce power. Its unfortunate to see the devastating effects of what the radiation has done to Japan but rest assured fossil fuels are a inexcusable alternative. I think japan should rethink their attitude towards emissions because a lot of countries look towards japan as a "big brother" and may want to lower their own expectations for emissions as well.
ReplyDeleteJapan's reversal on climate change and emissions is especially interesting to me since it can be argued they have suffered as heavily as anyone from the effects of global climate change. After the events of 2011; the 8.9 magnitude earthquake and tsunami which slammed into their coast one would think we be among those in the forefront of real change in the fight against climate change. Obviously as the article states having to close so many nuclear power plants has put tremendous strain on the countries ability to produce power affordably. It should not be discounted that while Japan will be giving an aid package to developing countries and aiding them to realize green energies, there own financial stability is also driving this decision. Fossil fuels are partly about being able to produce energy at a affordable and profitable rate.
ReplyDeleteI do disagree with the notion in the article that poor countries should be compensated for past disasters. This is not to say i in anyway feel aid should not be provided when disasters strike or private aid should not be given. but to think large countries can support poorer or less developed countries AND be able to devote the necessary resources to the many different projects and investments may be becoming unrealistic as many nations face financial difficulties and sluggish economies.
For some, it is hard to reconcile the idea of economic growth with long term sustainability. I understand that Japan is in a very awkward position as far as protecting their economic longevity, but they must also understand that as one of the world's largest CO2 emitters there lies a responsibility to ensure that their actions support environmental longevity. Japan's actions affect not only them (most notably after Fukushima) but the rest of the world. It is understandable that of course financial stability was at the forefront of this decision with them having to sacrifice a major income source with the closing of their many nuclear plants. The idea though of the aid packages should be revisited at a later date if they are unable to contribute on the global stage at this point. Ensuring that our contribution to climate change as a society doesn't hinder the planet's sustainability.
ReplyDeleteI wonder how much the fact that Japan currently has the highest gross government debt to GDP ratio in the world has to do with their decision to rescind their emissions target. This is an enormous shame. Japan has always been a global leader in sustainability and environmentalism and this marks a blow to them. Without any countries assuming leadership in the issue, reducing emissions as an objective has decreasing credibility in the eyes of other countries. "If the 'big guys' (US, UK, Japan now) aren't doing it, maybe I shouldn't either." I believe that the "big guys" have a responsibility to set emissions goals not just for sustainability's sake but to set an example for other countries.
ReplyDeleteyour right emissions goals should be reached and then there should even be a stretch goal on top of that for countries to try and reach.
DeleteIt's amazing to think that we have proof of global destruction, due to pollution into our environment, and yet countries won't take actions to cut back. Does Japan have to wait for their country to experience environmental destruction, before realizing that this whole time they were a major contributor to the damages? The occurrence of Haiyan simply did nothing in means of recognition to the country of Japan. If such a storm, that has left so many dead and injured, and has flipped an already impoverished country upside down, doesn't lead to a reverse in environmental pollution, then what will? As Kelly Dent stated, Japan just made an entire U Turn and went back on their word , and is indeed a slap in the face especially to the Philippines. Japan needs to step up and take responsibility now, it's not to late but someday it will be. It's all about money for Japan, and for many nations that refuse to cut back on emissions.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading this article, one could see that Japan is struggling to part ways with having a thriving economy in exchange for helping the environment and preserving the Earth. Japan has been victim to numerous natural disasters, as well as having their land affected by their nuclear power plant in Hiroshima. It is hard to watch Japan give up on trying to reduce their greenhouse gas emission. They are one of the largest countries in the world so with everyone’s eyes on them, they will get a lot of criticism for abandoning their plans to reduce greenhouse gas emission. In the wake of the recent typhoon in the Philippines, Japan should be more concerned because more natural disasters are going to occur in their region due to global warming that is being caused by their emissions. The country needs to part ways with some of their funds and start putting that money into coming up with a plan that can effect the environment. I also believe that other countries need to act on their own and make sure that their greenhouse gas emission are being reduced because maybe their efforts to fix this problem, will trickle down to Japan and they will begin to reconsider their recent decision.
ReplyDeleteIt is so disappointing to read an article like this one. Japan, instead of pursuing their ambitions plan to reduce emissions is now saying that their emissions may rise instead. I do understand the circumstances and the fact that they do have to supply energy to their citizens somehow, but to go back to the old method and import dirtier natural gas and coal is not a solution. Till recently, green groups didn’t target Japan because of its ambition plan to reduce emissions by 2020 and the willingness to help in climate change. So I do agree with Kelly Dent that "Japan's dramatic U-turn on its emissions target commitments is a slap in the face for poor countries who are right now struggling to cope with changes to their climate, and who will face yet more extreme and unpredictable weather in the future." Furthermore, this will send message to other developed countries that climate change is not that important and if something happens, it is ok to go back to polluting our planet. I also don’t have much faith now in Japan that they will raise $16 billion by 2015 to help poor nations reduce their emissions and adapt to the effects of climate change. Wouldn’t they start by reducing emission in their own country where the citizens can benefit from cleaner air? Lots of developing countries are counting on developed countries to stand up and do something, yet nothing is done because nobody wants to sacrifice economic growth and invest more money in renewable energy. As long as fossil energy is cheaper, it will be too costly to consider the cleaner energy.
ReplyDeleteIt is unfortunate to believe that Japan is going to sacrifice sustainability for their economic growth. I believe after reading this article that they have no plans for their future generations and think maybe everything will work itself out. Figueres said it perfect. "This move by Japan could have a devastating impact on the tone of discussion here in Warsaw," said Naoyuki Yamagishi, WWF Japan's climate ands enrgy group leader at the talks. "This decision is a gross negligence of its responsibility and should be revised in line with the level that science and justice requires." Gross negligence, this is what it comes down to. I think it is a hard position to make a country take the same side as everyone when it comes to sustainability but there has to be ways of enforcing rules.
ReplyDeleteThe biggest issue with countries including Japan is that environmental efforts are measured in money and not in the effects it has on our world. If environmental projects granted a universal advantage that does not necessarily include economical gain then perhaps countries such as Japan would not feel that the weighing scale between environmental sustainability and economical growth has a tipping side. The decision to become an environmentally friendly nation state begins with the individuals and government of that country. If politically there is an agreement as to how and what should be done to maintain resources as well as an economical filter then it is easier to discern between the necessities of a country and their greed.
ReplyDeletePerhaps Japan should take into consideration their not to far neighboring country China. Granted China’s Fukishima incident was not based on holding onto emissions but it certainly does pertain to economic greed and environmental overkill. Had the Chinese chosen an alternative to their fuel and energy then perhaps such an incident could have been avoided. Furthermore, Japan most considers the disadvantages this gives to the rest of the world. I am sure scientists in Japan are more than aware of the pollution and overall damage we as a world have done to our planet.
It is essential to set global limitations and rules on such worldwide influences such as nuclear power plant implantations and conservations of emissions. This should be more than just a set goal or expectation it should become a cardinal rule to perhaps countries legitimacy and if so, their economical stand point in the world. Just as how crimes of warfare are a serious taboo to institutions such as the United Nations, the act of neglecting environmental growth should equally be frowned upon.
The focus of this article on Japan's change of heart towards the former emissions reduction agreement is surely disheartening to many. As the article states, Japan is in the top 5 for leading the world in greenhouse gas emissions and could have been a leader in reducing them as well. Also the implications this may have on many developing countries seems to be negative as well. A follow the leader sort of mentality seems to be the precursor in these types of agreements and after Japan revoked their agreement, some countries may not take this as seriously. However, what this article lacks is an explanation as to why Japan revoked their emissions goals, and instead provides the solution Japan has offered up to $16b to help developing countries reduce their own emissions. This offer is certainly questionable, because why couldn't Japan just invest that money into their own country's emissions reduction plan. It seems a mystery for now.
ReplyDeleteNicholas Maier
It is unfortunate news to hear that Japan has gotten rid of the plan to reduce their carbon emissions. The country has been dealing with the effects of recent turmoil due to natural disasters, but should not be an excuse to totally slash the efforts. Japan was discouraged when 50 nuclear power plants where shut down because of the earthquake, giving up on its plans. I agree with what Kelly Dent stated "Japan's dramatic U-turn on its emissions target commitments is a slap in the face for poor countries who are right now struggling to cope with changes to their climate, and who will face yet more extreme and unpredictable weather in the future." Japan as the world’s 5th carbon producing nation should be stepping up and taking responsibility for its actions. Developed countries need to lead by example and convince Japan to change its mind and put some sort of plan in order even if it’s not to the same degree as the previous one. Japan should at least make an effort to reduce their carbon emissions to resume its leadership role in the worlds climate change.
ReplyDeleteGreat post !! Thanks for sharing valuable content.
ReplyDeleteClick here to know more UN sustainable development goals followed by The Social Ripples.
Great post !! Thanks for sharing valuable content.
ReplyDeleteClick here to know more united nations sustainable development goals