GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE CANCUN PETITION FOR COP16

GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE CANCUN PETITION FOR COP16:

DEMANDING ACTION IN CANCUN AND LEGAL ACTION THEREAFTER SHOULD NO ADEQUATE AGREEMENT BE REACHED

Please visit www.climatechangecancun.org for further details

We the undersigned demand immediate action on climate change prevention in Cancun at the United Nations COP 16 Climate Change Conference or legal action to enforce action thereafter.

The time for procrastination about climate change has long since passed; the world is in a state of emergency and further inaction is gross or even criminal negligence.

At Cancun states must agree to base the COP16 on the UNFCCC and on credible emerging and current science and the precautionary principle and thus:
 
Targets and Timeframes
Because of the global urgency, there must be the political will to return earth%u2019s temperature to its natural pre-industrial level, and strict time frames must be imposed, so that overall global emissions of greenhouse gases will begin to be reversed as of 2011. There must be a global target for greenhouse gas emission reductions of at least 30% below 1990 levels by 2015, at least 50% below 1990 levels by 2020, at least 75% below 1990 levels by 2030, at least 85% below 1990 levels by 2040 and 100% below 1990 emissions by 2050 (please see table 1 for detailed data calculations), while adhering to the precautionary principle, the differentiated responsibility principle *, and the fair and just transition principle. The required reductions in emissions cannot be achieved without an immediate end to the destruction of carbon sinks. Under the UNFCCC, every state signatory incurred the obligation to conserve carbon sinks; thus the destruction of sinks, including deforestation and elimination of bogs must end immediately.
 
The goal of COP 16 must be to return temperatures to pre-industrial levels and return atmospheric CO2 back to 278ppm at the latest by 2050.
 
To succeed in being below the dangerous 1 degree target, member states of the United Nations must commit to remove CO2 from the atmosphere. It is estimated that to remove the necessary CO2 from the atmosphere, member states of the United Nations would have to commit to removing over 1000GT CO2 by 2050. This must be done through socially equitable and environmentally safe and sound methods and the levels required calculated within an in depth research project. Greenhouse Gas emissions resulting from destructive land use practices including in the rural, the urban and peri-urban environment must end. In order to achieve the required emission reductions, deforestation and the destruction of carbon sinks must end immediately and developing nations whose development will be affected must be compensated.
At this stage where the point of no return is approached, legal action must be taken to address the dereliction of duty and irresponsible behaviour of the major per capita greenhouse gas emitting states should no adequate agreement be reached in Cancun.

The right to development must be fulfilled so as to equitably meet developmental and environmental needs of developing countries and of present and future generations.
 
The credible current emerging science has indicated that the global climate crisis is much more urgent than was conveyed in the 2007 IPCC Report that was based on data from the years 2004 and 2005. As such current and emerging science and not the science from the 2007 IPCC Report must be used in Cancun.
 
The emissions reduction required to avoid dangerous climate change and the small timeframes available to achieve this are so extreme that the methods used to achieve the required reductions must be based on the maximum achievable targets within the shortest timeframes as described in diagram 1 at www.climatechangecancun.org.
 
Criminal Effects of Climate Change
The Global Humanitarian Forum Climate Change Human Impact report that summarised data including that issued by WHO on the impacts estimates that in 2009, 325 million people were seriously affected by climate change (based on negative health outcomes), and there were 303,000 deaths as a result of climate change. It predicts that in 2030, 660 million people a year will be affected by climate change and that 471,500 people will die from climate change. These factual estimates invoke very serious legal obligations for immediate action based on the current science. Action that will knowingly cause deaths which number over 10 million must be treated as crimes. Climate change could kill 250,000 children next year, and the figure could rise to more than 400,000 by 2030, according to a report by Save the Children, Feeling the Heat.
 
Science
A paper published in Nature (no. 458) on the 30 April 2009 which is the up to date current science on climate change emission thresholds states that in order to have an 8-37% chance of not exceeding 2 Degrees you can only emit 886GT CO2 between 2000 and 2050. Between 2000 and 2010 363GT CO2 or 41% of the total budget have been giving a high chance of exceeding 2 Degrees. Currently the temperature is at 0.78 Degrees above pre-industrial temperatures and possibly committed to at least 0.6 Degrees of further warming (Lenton et al). At 1.5 Degree Lenton et al suggest that forest dieback will emit an additional 100Gt of CO2, reducing the 886 GT limit to 776GT. In addition, at COP15, a representative from IPCC states that at a 2 degree rise in temperature the poor, the vulnerable and the disenfranchised would not survive and at 1.5 degrees they night. Thus the Copenhagen Accord which put 2 degrees as the limit not only ignored the science but could be deemed to be criminally negligent.   An important recent paper by Turney and Jones (Does the Agulhas Current amplify global temperatures during super-interglacials?, Chris S.M. Turney, Richard T. Jones, Journal of Quaternary Science, Volume 25, Issue 6, September 2010) suggests that at 1.9 Degrees there is a high risk of a rise in sea levels of between 6.6 and 9.4 m and serious disturbance to regional ocean circulations that can amplify warming effects. Based on these facts it is clear that an agreement must be reached this year.

Legal Remedy
THAT in addition, major greenhouse gas-producing states must be forced to implement the actions that would discharge the obligations incurred when they signed and ratified the UNFCCC (provisions of the UNFCCC have become international peremptory norms and as such are binding) and other legal obligations and be forced to repay the emission debt. Historic emissions should be calculated and an assessment made of the degree of dereliction of duty in the implementation of the UNFCCC. From these assessments, provisions must be made to compensate the states that have been most damaged by the failure, of the major greenhouse gas emitting states, to discharge obligations under the Convention. In such cases, a fund should be set up to assist vulnerable states in taking delinquent states to the International Court of Justice, including the Chamber on Environmental Matters   (http://www.icjcij.org/presscom/index.php?pr=106&p1=6&p2=1&search=%22%22Composition of the Chamber for Environmental Matters

Funding
Industrialized states and major greenhouse gas producers must be prepared to enter into binding obligations not only through targets and time frames but also through funding mechanisms. This fund could be named Fund for the Implementation of the UNFCCC, and it would fund socially equitable and environmentally safe and sound energy renewable energy, transportation, agriculture and forestry. This fund would replace the GEF as the main source of funding for the UNFCCC. This international fund would take funds traditionally distributed not only through the GEF but also through the Bretton Woods institutions, such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, and additional bilateral funds, and now be channelled through this global fund. This fund would be indispensable for preventing climate change, and for achieving the objectives of the UNFCCC.  Additional funds must be derived from reallocation of global military expenses, including budgets and arms production; at the 1992 United Nations Conference on the Environment and Development, all member states of the United Nations  agreed, in Chapter 33 of Agenda 21, to the reallocation of military expenses. Additionally budgetary sources for this Fund would be the redirecting of subsidies from socially inequitable and environmentally unsound non-sustainable energy. The financial deal must include the cancellation of the outstanding debt of developing states, and the implementation of the minimal long-standing commitment of 0.7% of GDP being transferred to Overseas Development (ODA). The 0.7% obligation for development must not be diverted to climate change; there must be an additional obligation of more than 7% of GDP specifically designated for addressing climate change prevention. Any shortfall in funding should be bolstered by increased ODA by nations that inequitably have gained an advantage from historical emissions or reduction scenarios that are not in line with the principle of equity.

These funding measures could only just begin to compensate for the emissions debt owed, by the developed states to the developing states.
 
Militarism
The IPCC and COP have not separately calculated the impact of militarism on greenhouse gas emissions  At the same time the dangers related to climate change, and the potential security implications related to resource conflict, and militarism has to be addressed.There is a disturbing link between foreign refusal to supply fossil fuel for the consumption of developed states being deemed to violate "strategic national interest" of developed states and and the possible result of military intervention.

Vested Interests and need for majority decision making at COP
The entrenched immovable national interests have served to block serious legally binding instruments in Cancun; must be prevented from blocking the adoption, in the General Assembly, of a strong legally binding agreement on climate change. Article 18 of the Charter of the United Nations reads: Decisions of the General Assembly on important questions shall be made by a two-thirds majority of the members present and voting. These questions shall include recommendations with respect to the maintenance of international peace and security.Undoubtedly, the impact of climate change could be deemed to fall under this category. In Cancun, given the urgency of the issue of climate change, and its potential effects on the global population and on the political, economic, ecological and social global systems, the requirement for consensus must be waived, and a binding agreement on all states will be deemed to exist, if 66 % of the states concur. It is possible that a majority of the member states could agree to a strong legally binding Cancun protocol to the UNFCCC. A strong Protocol to the UNFCCC could then be used against the delinquent states, and a case could be taken to the International Court of Justice under the UNFCCC, which has been signed and ratified by 192 states. Even most of the delinquent states including Canada and the US, have signed and ratified the UNFCCC. If not 66%, then the proposal made by Papua New Guinea at COP 15 should be in place in Cancun; the proposal was that the state parties to the Convention should strive for consensus with a fall back on 75%. It should be noted that the UNFCCC was adopted by 150 of the then188 members of the United Nations (79%) and that under article 2 of the Montreal Protocol, Parties can if all efforts at consensus have been exhausted, and no agreement reached, adopt decisions by a two-thirds majority.
THAT All NGOS, including industry front group participating at the UN Conferences, including COP 16 in Cancun must reveal any sources of funding, such as that of corporate funding, or any board members that might jeopardise the willingness of the NGOS to take strong positions or that might seriously place the NGOs in conflict of interest

CSD
The Commission on Sustainable Development, in light of the failure in negotiations of CSD15 must now produce an appropriate outcome on climate change and other issues, be upgraded to a Council, which would be able to convene at any time to deal with new or emerging environmental threats. The General Assembly Resolution A/RES/47/191 states that the Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) should ensure effective follow-up to Agenda 21, and other UNCED obligations and commitments that Includes the UNFCCC.