Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]


Reply
Climate Change Will Be Solved in Cities--Or Not at All
Topic Started: 24 Sep 2014, 09:31 AM (532 Views)
peter fraser
Member Avatar



Climate Change Will Be Solved in Cities--Or Not at All

As world leaders gathered at the U.N. to talk about global warming, mayors set about actually doing something about climate change
Sep 23, 2014 By David Biello


In the 1980s, the Chinese city of Shenzhen had some 300,000 mostly impoverished inhabitants. Today, that city—the first to experience China's reform and economic opening—has more than 15 million residents and also hosts another first in China's history—a carbon market. Shenzhen's market to reduce global warming pollution covers some 620 manufacturers and other industries that collectively grew by 9 percent in 2013. The buying and selling of permits to emit CO2 pollution resulted in a drop of 500,000 metric tons in the manufacturing sector and swapping cleaner energy for coal reduced carbon dioxide emissions by 2 million metric tons for the entire city.

"If you can know Shenzhen can do this then you can believe Chinese government can do this as well," says Tang Jie, vice mayor of one of the largest megacities in China, who says the overall goal is to have total pollution peak as soon as possible. "In 2020, our city will leap over the emission peak. If Shenzhen can make this peak, I think maybe in 10 or 15 years whole of China can peak."

As Shenzhen goes—and Beijing, Chongqing and Shanghai, all Chinese cities with new carbon market experiments—so goes China. And as China goes when it comes to spewing carbon dioxide into the sky, so goes the world—China is the world's largest emitter of global warming pollution and the 1.2 billion Chinese now emit as much per person as the roughly 500 million citizens of the European Union thanks to a growing coal habit.

As world leaders gather at the U.N. on September 23 to reiterate or reveal pledges for action to combat climate change, it is in cities that reductions to global warming pollution are actually happening. That could be alternative fuel vehicles in Jinan, China, a program to share electric cars in Paris or rapid-transit buses in Curitiba, Brazil. Or it could be a massive program to retrofit old buildings here in New York City. At the U.N. summit, 228 cities representing 436 million people committed to avoid more than 2 gigatonnes of greenhouse gas pollution per year going forward under a new global "Compact of Mayors." And 25 cities pledged to cut methane pollution seeping out of garbage dumps.

At the same meeting, the U.S. and China reiterated previous pledges to cut CO2 pollution by 17 percent and reduce carbon intensity by as much as 45 percent, both below 2005 levels by 2020, respectively. "Nations are not delivering," says Eduardo Paes, mayor of Rio de Janeiro and chair of the C40 group of cities to combat climate change. "How can there be any argument against prioritizing cities?"

Cities around the globe are growing fast—more than half of the world's 7.2 billion people now live in one city or another, a number expected to swell to more than 6 billion people living in cities by 2050, mostly in Africa and Asia. Cities now deliver fully three-quarters of global economic activity—more than $50 trillion. And it is citizens of cities who are responsible for at least half of all greenhouse gas pollution—through demand for heating and cooling, food, lighting and entertainment. As a result, city action (or inaction) on climate change may determine the ultimate outcome of global warming. "The future is in the cities," says Jeffrey Sachs, economist and director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University.

In fact, the decisions surrounding how the world urbanizes will determine the future course of global warming—as the World Resources Institute notes: sprawling Atlanta emits 10 times as much greenhouse gases as compact Barcelona simply because of transportation needs. If emerging cities follow the Atlanta model the world will be a lot hotter. And at the same time as cities struggle to combat climate change, cities will also have to solve problems like urban poverty and inequality. "If we miss it in the next 15 years, we will create another lost generation," says Aromar Revi, director of the Indian Institute for Human Settlements.

The C40 group of cities—69 cities now that have banded together to combat climate change—have released research that shows that city actions to reduce pollution from buildings, cars and garbage could cut global warming pollution by nearly 4 gigatonnes of greenhouse gases in the next two decades—and 8 gigatonnes by 2050—in addition to any national policies. More importantly, mayors have more direct control over such policies in their cities. "We have strong constituencies we can't hide from. We don't want to hide from," says Bill de Blasio, mayor of New York City. "We are held accountable in a way that national leaders are not."

At the same time, cities are competing to be as livable as possible. While Beijing may have a carbon market and mandates to remove coal-burning from city limits, Melbourne in Australia plans to be zero net emissions by the end of the decade. And Copenhagen, capital of Denmark, hopes to be the world's first climate neutral capital by 2025—a goal already achieved by the nearby island of Samso. As Paris mayor Ann Hidalgo puts it, cities are going through a "transition ecologique," commenting on her city's electric car sharing program: "if cities say we don't want fossil fuel cars then industry will provide." A new Urban Electric Mobility Initiative announced at the U.N. aims to increase electric vehicle sales for use in cities to at least 30 percent by 2030.

Most importantly perhaps, it is cities that face the brunt of climate change threats, such as sea level rise. Cities are on the "frontlines of this war," Paes says. "The victims are city residents."

Hurricane Sandy delivered a foreshadowing of climate change to come to New York City in 2012. Downtown was inundated and dark, and even the U.N. building itself flooded for the first time in its 70-year history in the city. "Climate change is the defining issue of our time," says Ban-ki Moon, U.N. Secretary General. "It's not a distant threat."

New York City has already cut greenhouse gas emissions by 19 percent since 2005, thanks to efforts initiated by former Mayor Bloomberg—now U.N. envoy for cities—and continued under de Blasio. And while national leaders speak in generalities of a global climate deal signed in Paris in 2015 with targets to be negotiated, mayors of cities in almost every country are implementing programs that actually reduce CO2 pollution.

New York City, for one, will go further than the U.S., committing to reducing greenhouse gas pollution by 80 percent by 2050, and has released a plan to achieve that. The centerpiece is refurbishing old buildings to be more energy efficient because old and new constructions are responsible for 75 percent of the city's global warming pollution. "The failure to reach that goal dooms us all," de Blasio says. "If we don't get it right now, at some point it will be too late."
Any expressed market opinion is my own and is not to be taken as financial advice
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Foxy
Member Avatar
Zero is coming...

Noooooooooooo

Peter
http://www.afr.com/content/dam/images/g/n/2/1/u/8/image.imgtype.afrArticleInline.620x0.png/1456285515560.png
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
derp
Unregistered

I have to say that this is one of the most honest alarmist articles I've read.

1. No mention of "global warming", which clearly isn't occurring.
2. No statement that CO2 is the driver of climate change, which is not supported by evidence.

The article clearly explains that the quest to reduce CO2 is simply an efficiency drive that is rendered meaningful because it will 'stop' climate change. The climate change boogeyman gives people a concrete reason to increase efficiency. Without the bogeyman most people would fail to understand the efficiency drive. The naked arbitrary nature of the efficiency drive would not be compelling enough to sway the masses.

For most of the last 2000 years, social order was maintained by the fear of an almighty God. Perhaps, the next 2000 years we will see order maintained by fear of a changing climate. So be it.
"REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Count du Monet
Member Avatar


It means to right to pollute can be bought and sold. The end result is the Hedge funds will monopolize it.
The next trick of our glorious banks will be to charge us a fee for using net bank!!!
You are no longer customer, you are property!!!

Don't be SAUCY with me Bernaisse
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Foxy
Member Avatar
Zero is coming...

derp
24 Sep 2014, 12:38 PM
I have to say that this is one of the most honest alarmist articles I've read.

1. No mention of "global warming", which clearly isn't occurring.
2. No statement that CO2 is the driver of climate change, which is not supported by evidence.

The article clearly explains that the quest to reduce CO2 is simply an efficiency drive that is rendered meaningful because it will 'stop' climate change. The climate change boogeyman gives people a concrete reason to increase efficiency. Without the bogeyman most people would fail to understand the efficiency drive. The naked arbitrary nature of the efficiency drive would not be compelling enough to sway the masses.

For most of the last 2000 years, social order was maintained by the fear of an almighty God. Perhaps, the next 2000 years we will see order maintained by fear of a changing climate. So be it.
It is just a tax grab.

And what a ripper it is, a tax that the fools are begging for.

Dumb and dumber.

Peter

Global weather has nothing to do with the big yellow thing in the sky. Now does it.
http://www.afr.com/content/dam/images/g/n/2/1/u/8/image.imgtype.afrArticleInline.620x0.png/1456285515560.png
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
derp
Unregistered

Peter Fraser,

Just in from New York.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQ3gRNVLfg8

Have you been mentoring the New Yorkers?
"REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
peter fraser
Member Avatar


An interesting chart.

Posted Image
Attached to this post:
Attachments: clean_energy_investor.png (81.92 KB)
Edited by peter fraser, 28 Sep 2014, 07:21 AM.
Any expressed market opinion is my own and is not to be taken as financial advice
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · Australian Property Forum · Next Topic »
Reply



Australian Property Forum is an economics and finance forum dedicated to discussion of Australian and global real estate markets and macroeconomics, including house prices, housing affordability, and the likelihood of a property crash. Is there an Australian housing bubble? Will house prices crash, boom or stagnate? Is the Australian property market a pyramid scheme or Ponzi scheme? Can house prices really rise forever? These are the questions we address on Australian Property Forum, the premier real estate site for property bears, bulls, investors, and speculators. Members may also discuss matters related to finance, modern monetary theory (MMT), debt deflation, cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin Ethereum and Ripple, property investing, landlords, tenants, debt consolidation, reverse home equity loans, the housing shortage, negative gearing, capital gains tax, land tax and macro prudential regulation.

Forum Rules: The main forum may be used to discuss property, politics, economics and finance, precious metals, crypto currency, debt management, generational divides, climate change, sustainability, alternative energy, environmental topics, human rights or social justice issues, and other topics on a case by case basis. Topics unsuitable for the main forum may be discussed in the lounge. You agree you won't use this forum to post material that is illegal, private, defamatory, pornographic, excessively abusive or profane, threatening, or invasive of another forum member's privacy. Don't post NSFW content. Racist or ethnic slurs and homophobic comments aren't tolerated. Accusing forum members of serious crimes is not permitted. Accusations, attacks, abuse or threats, litigious or otherwise, directed against the forum or forum administrators aren't tolerated and will result in immediate suspension of your account for a number of days depending on the severity of the attack. No spamming or advertising in the main forum. Spamming includes repeating the same message over and over again within a short period of time. Don't post ALL CAPS thread titles. The Advertising and Promotion Subforum may be used to promote your Australian property related business or service. Active members of the forum who contribute regularly to main forum discussions may also include a link to their product or service in their signature block. Members are limited to one actively posting account each. A secondary account may be used solely for the purpose of maintaining a blog as long as that account no longer posts in threads. Any member who believes another member has violated these rules may report the offending post using the report button.

Australian Property Forum complies with ASIC Regulatory Guide 162 regarding Internet Discussion Sites. Australian Property Forum is not a provider of financial advice. Australian Property Forum does not in any way endorse the views and opinions of its members, nor does it vouch for for the accuracy or authenticity of their posts. It is not permitted for any Australian Property Forum member to post in the role of a licensed financial advisor or to post as the representative of a financial advisor. It is not permitted for Australian Property Forum members to ask for or offer specific buy, sell or hold recommendations on particular stocks, as a response to a request of this nature may be considered the provision of financial advice.

Views expressed on this forum are not representative of the forum owners. The forum owners are not liable or responsible for comments posted. Information posted does not constitute financial or legal advice. The forum owners accept no liability for information posted, nor for consequences of actions taken on the basis of that information. By visiting or using this forum, members and guests agree to be bound by the Zetaboards Terms of Use.

This site may contain copyright material (i.e. attributed snippets from online news reports), the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such content is posted to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific, and social justice issues. This constitutes 'fair use' of such copyright material as provided for in section 107 of US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed for research and educational purposes only. If you wish to use this material for purposes that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Such material is credited to the true owner or licensee. We will remove from the forum any such material upon the request of the owners of the copyright of said material, as we claim no credit for such material.

For more information go to Limitations on Exclusive Rights: Fair Use

Privacy Policy: Australian Property Forum uses third party advertising companies to serve ads when you visit our site. These third party advertising companies may collect and use information about your visits to Australian Property Forum as well as other web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services of interest to you. If you would like more information about this practice and to know your choices about not having this information used by these companies, click here: Google Advertising Privacy FAQ

Australian Property Forum is hosted by Zetaboards. Please refer also to the Zetaboards Privacy Policy