G8 strikes emissions deal

Last year the G8 agreed only to 'seriously consider' a cut of 50% by 2050, according to The Guardian. The signing of the statement means that attention now shifts to the UN-led climate change talks that are set to conclude in Copenhagen in December 2009. These talks are due to set a framework for a deal to replace the Kyoto protocol when it expires in 2012. The carefully crafted statement is designed to bridge the differences between the Americans on the one hand and the EU and Japan on the other. The EU's executive welcomed the deal on climate change, saying it represented a 'new, shared vision' and kept negotiations on track for a global deal in 2009. Full report in The Guardian

But critics outside the rich nations' club, including SA, slammed the deal. South African Environment Minister Marthinus van Schalkwyk rejected the statement. He said he feared this year's communiqué was actually a step backward. 'While the statement may appear as a movement forward, we are concerned that it may, in effect, be a regression from what is required to make a meaningful contribution to meeting the challenges of climate change,' van Schalkwyk said, says a report on the IoL site. 'To be meaningful and credible a long-term goal must have a base year. It must be underpinned by ambitious mid-term targets and actions and it should be based on an equitable burden-sharing paradigm,' he said. Full report on IoL site

Environmental campaign group WWF said the leaders had ducked their responsibilities. 'The G8 are responsible for 62% of the carbon dioxide accumulated in the Earth's atmosphere, which makes them the main culprit of climate change and the biggest part of the problem,' WWF said, notes a report on the Mail & Guardian Online site. 'WWF finds it pathetic that they still duck their historic responsibility ...,' the campaign group said. Full report on Mail & Guardian Online site

The deal appeared to fail to set a goal for cutting emissions over the next decade, and drew sharp criticism from environmentalists, who called it a missed opportunity. In a sense, says an International Herald Tribune report, the document represents an environmental quid pro quo. In exchange for agreeing to the '50 by 2050' language, Bush got what he has sought as his price for joining an international accord: a statement from the rest of the G8 that developing nations like China and India, which have not accepted mandatory caps on carbon emissions, must be included in any climate change treaty. The statement left unclear, for instance, whether the cuts made by 2050 would be pegged to current emissions levels, or 1990 levels, as many advocates had hoped. A 50% cut from current levels will result in a less significant decrease by 2050 than Japan and European nations had envisioned under the Kyoto Protocol. Kyoto and earlier agreements had set 1990 as the baseline for future cuts. The US emitted about 20% more carbon dioxide in 2007 than it did in 1990. Full International Herald Tribune report

But the value of the declaration was also in doubt after China and India refused to budge on setting targets for carbon emissions cuts by 2050. They have instead reiterated their view that it was largely the responsibility of rich nations to clear up the mess they had created. On other global problems, the summit also appeared to make little headway, according to the Financial Times. Without major Middle Eastern oil producers present, experts said, there was little G8 leaders could do on petroleum prices except call for more investment and market transparency. They did express a desire for more regular dialogue between producers and consumers. They also stressed the importance of energy efficiency as a long-term solution to fossil fuel dependence. Full Financial Times report

Oil prices are too high and threaten the global economy but also open the way to huge energy and pollution savings by spurring new technologies and policies, the International Energy Agency (IEA) said, notes a report in the Cape Argus. The IEA published 25 recommendations on energy efficiency it had submitted to the G8, in what it said was 'a win-win strategy' in providing clean and secure energy alongside adequate stimulus to economic growth. It pinpointed the storage of CO², and wind, solar and tidal power. A big contribution can be made by replacing coal-fired power stations with plants using the latest technology. Full Cape Argus report (subscription needed) View the IEA's reports to the G8