Search

Over two centuries of economic growth have put undeniable pressure on the ecological systems that underpin human well-being. While it is agreed that these pressures are increasing, views divide on how they may be alleviated. Some suggest technological advances will automatically keep us from transgressing key environmental thresholds; others that policy reform can reconcile economic and ecological goals; while a third school argues that only a fundamental shift in societal values can keep human demands within the Earth's ecological limits. Here we use novel integrated analysis of the energy-water-food nexus, rural land use (including biodiversity), material flows and climate change to explore whether mounting ecological pressures in Australia can be reversed, while the population grows and living standards improve. We show that, in the right circumstances, economic and environmental outcomes can be decoupled. Although economic growth is strong across all scenarios, environmental performance varies widely: pressures are projected to more than double, stabilize or fall markedly by 2050. However, we find no evidence that decoupling will occur automatically. Nor do we find that a shift in societal values is required. Rather, extensions of current policies that mobilize technology and incentivize reduced pressure account for the majority of differences in environmental performance. Our results show that Australia can make great progress towards sustainable prosperity, if it chooses to do so. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the importance of addressing the perceptions for the global climate change. Climate modelers have used these perceptions to analyze and manage climate change. However, perceptions can lead to several assumptions which include the increase of energy efficiency and the decrease of carbon emission. Global policy are urged to increase the progress of energy technology and efficiency through the new research, new incentives and new costs for fossil fuels. The scheme of providing more energy in a lesser damaging way is also important.

The article reports on the deforestation issues which will be discussed at the global carbon emission control forum. According to the report, European companies seek to offset their greenhouse-gas emissions under the Kyoto Protocol for it is generating billions of dollars into clean-energy projects in the developing world. However, the policy does not include funds to prevent deforestation, which is responsible for some 20% of global carbon emissions. Environmental experts ensures that deforestation will be part of the meeting's agenda as the international negotiators of United Nations will be gathered for climate change in Bali, Indonesia.

The article critically discusses the views expressed in the Nicholas Stern Report. The article questions the valuation methods to estimate the reduction of greenhouse gases by the year 2050. The article also present differing views from scientists on how the present generation should value the future generation's welfare. The article concludes with the comment by economist Ottmar Edinhofer at the Postsdam Institute of Climate Impact Research that the focus should be on reducing emissions.

The article reports on the challenges faced by U.S. President George W. Bush and his administration with the climate-change policy in the U.S. There is an argument that the Environmental Protection Agency should be forced to regulate greenhouse-gas emissions from cars and trucks as a pollutant. The problem is that climate change is a large and global problem that the emission in question may not make a huge difference by themselves.

The article presents the Stern review on the economics of climate change. The review states that tackling climate change would cost 20 times less than doing nothing. The review triggered debate about the issue by economists and other scientific community, and experts consider the report as more of political than scientific in nature, as it covers wide and complex range of subjects. The article also evaluates the cost of environmental effects in dollar terms and recommends tough measures.

The non-participation of the United States in the recently ratified Kyoto Protocol is a matter for global concern because it is estimated that the country produces 24% of all greenhouse-gas emissions worldwide. Here we analyse the commitment of individual states and municipalities to addressing this problem and find that, despite the federal policy, between 24 and 35% of the US population are currently (or soon will be) engaged in policies directed towards significantly reducing anthropogenic climate change. The importance of this sub-national effort, which we estimate corresponds to 27–49% of the gross domestic product, will depend — like the targets adopted in Kyoto — on the real reductions achieved in greenhouse-gas emissions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that focuses on impacts of climate change and mentions that the report suggests for policy and technological changes for the stabilization of atmospheric greenhouse-gas concentrations. It mentions that climate experts and policy analysts find the report disappointing and presents views of several climate and climate-policy experts including Glen Peters, Steve Rayner and Robert Stavins.

The article examines the influence of academic reports and press coverage about the worst environmental conditions on the way the government makes its plans and policies. It is perceived that reports about the threatening environmental condition especially climate change may have attracted the attention of the government but failed to assure its action plant in dealing with the problem. Despite the threatening impact of these environmental conditions on human safety, it is not addressed well.

The article reports on British Prime Minister Gordon Brown's creation of a Department of Energy and Climate Change. The announcement was made on October 3, 2008 as part of a wider recognition of the government. The creation of the department was widely praised by environmentalists. The article reports on climate change and energy policy in Great Britain.

The article reports on the agreed details of a fund to aid vulnerable nations adapt to climate change. The fund that would generate through two percent levy on transactions in the Kyoto Protocol's emissions-trading mechanism have been settled on the United Nation's Framework Convention on Climate Change. The decision is an advantage for poor countries which have argued to have its own board and governance system. On the other hand, scientists in Bali demand governments to stabilize global emissions. They warned that higher concentrations may result to unmanageable climate change.

The author reflects on the testimony of Al Gore on climate change in the United States Congress. Gore's recommendations include reducing the emission levels, carbon tax, ban on incandescent light bulbs and new coal plants, corporate disclosure of carbon emissions and mileage standards for cars. The author also discusses the duties of politicians on climate change policy.

The editorial comments on the Nicholas Stern's global environmental review, focusing on the economics of climate change that was commissioned by Gordon Brown, Britain's chancellor of the exchequer. The article also presents that, while recommending to act on stabilizing the level of greenhouse gas at twice the pre-industrial CO2 gas levels, the investment needed to control climate change is small compared with the costs of allowing it to continue unabated.

The article reports that the latest global meeting on climate change wrapped up in Argentina this week, having made only modest steps towards cutting future greenhouse-gas emissions. Delegates from many nations said that the United States and its allies, such as Saudi Arabia, thwarted progress at the tenth meeting of the Conference of Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. During the conference, the United States strongly opposed the idea of using any seminars scheduled between now and next November to jump-start discussions about 2012 and beyond. Environmental groups attacked this position as deliberately obstructive. Saudi Arabia also caused dissent at the meeting,by asking for money from the "adaptation fund" to offset the economic losses it will suffer when petroleum exports are reduced.

The article focuses on Russian politics and Kyoto protocol. A move by Russia to support the Kyoto Protocol should usher in an era of international collaboration in mitigating climate change. Validating emissions trading and bringing developing economies into the fold are the next priorities. Russia’s climate politics are something of a mystery to outsiders, but the Russian government has reportedly decided to ratify the Kyoto Protocol on climate change, and approval by the parliament should be a formality. Thus the last obstacle to the protocol’s coming into force is set to be removed.

Reports on the failure of the Russian Academy of Sciences to provide the quality of research or scientific advice on scientific issues like the Kyoto Protocol. Criticism of the advice of the academy to President Vladimir Putin on climate change; Failure of the advice to reflect the views climate scientists; Functions of the academy.

Comments on the efforts of the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush to address criticisms on the absence of programs related to problems of global climate change and the country's dependency on foreign oil. Announcement of plans to encourage private companies to set limits on their own carbon emissions; Inadequacy of the government's programs.

Looks at the response of scientists on the plan proposed by the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush on climate change. Plan's lack of clear priorities and detailed objectives; Concern on the administration's lack of real interest in supporting research on global climate change.

Focuses on the concern of the American public over climatic changes. Citation of the neglect of the Bush administration in addressing climate issues; Plan of reviewing the U.S. Global Climate Change Research Program; Need for a balanced program.