Whither the Science in the COP-17 negotiations?

By Prof. Jeff Niemitz

I’ll admit from the outset that I know relatively little about the art of negotiation of the climate actions on the table in Durban.  I have learned a lot in the past two weeks however.  It is always hard to bridge the gap between the science and the policy implications that may go along with it.  This appears to be the case this year at COP-17.  The science, while well digested from the IPCC 2007 report, does not appear to be much of an influence on the negotiations 4 years hence.  Even a very important interim report from the IPCC on the increasing extreme weather events the world has been experiencing including the eastern US as you all know (excessive rain this fall, Hurricane Irene and Lee, snow in October, tornadoes in the SE) was received without much fanfare. This has baffled the Chair of the IPCC, Mr. Pachari.  We had breakfast with Mr. Pachari yesterday where he expressed his disappointment in the lack of science in the proceedings at COP-17.  In fact there is relatively little science “education” going on in the side events and country presentations. Much of the science that is being presented is very much an overview of what is thought to be known.  The oceans as some are complaining are largely being ignored as a part of the earth system that not only needs to be restored but may play the most crucial role in abrupt climate change in the near future.  This is not solely because of sea level change and coastal surges from stronger storms, which are threatening the AOSIS countries like Kirabati and Tuvalu with extinction imminently but the ability of the oceans to take up CO2 in the near future given rising ocean temperatures and its threat to the primary productivity of the oceans. There is evidence now of large scale O2 minima zones forming in the open ocean and in large upwelling systems that will retard CO2 uptake even more.  While the emphasis has been on the land ecosystems, which sustain the world’s ever increasing population through agriculture and other land use, this ecosystem can be rehabilitated if we act now.  The oceans will be a much more difficult ecosystem to restore because we will of necessity need to mitigate the atmospheric CO2 content before an improvement is seen.  Even if reductions in CO2 are realized now or before 2015 as hoped, the oceans will continue to be impacted by GHG’s already in the atmosphere for centuries to come.  What is needed most is education about the role of the complex science in the climate debate.  Ironically while the US delegation my confide as individual citizens that they more than understand what is happening to the climate and it is not good, The US Congress appears to deny the reality of the science.  This will make it very difficult for the US to be part of the solution rather than part of the problem.  If we understand the urgency of the situation from the science we cannot but be moved to greater steps in worldwide reduction of GHG’s before 2015.  Ask a scientist what this is all about so you can make your own informed decisions and influence our government to take action.