E-news update October 2 2006 In this issue: POLICY 1.1 ... - Focus

focus.si

E-news update October 2 2006 In this issue: POLICY 1.1 ... - Focus

E-news update October 2 2006

In this issue:

POLICY

1.1. Merkel to Target Climate Change as G8, EU Leader

1.2. White House Says No Change on US Carbon Strategy

1.3. Energy efficiency plan hanging in the balance

1.4. Shocking Decision: Commission tells EU countries: 'stop subsidising renewable power'

ENERGY AND EMISSIONS

2.1. Global Bioenergy Partnership Secretariat up, running

2.2. Methane emissions soar as China booms

2.3. Analysis-Economists on climate change: do we care?

2.4. Civil Society Groups criticise World Bank Clean Energy Strategy

CLIMATE IMPACTS

3.1. Severe Impacts of Climate Change on Key Ecosystems Worldwide

3.2. U.S. blocked hurricane report, journal says

CONFERENCES

4.1. 7th Annual WADE Decentralized Energy Conference Expo & Annual Meeting

4.2. Energy Independence powered by Wind

4.3. Carbon Market Insights 2007

ANNOUNCEMENT

5.1. Invitation for comments – JI project in Bulgaria

POLICY

1.1. Merkel to Target Climate Change as G8, EU Leader

28 September 2006

Germany will take the reins of both the G8 and the European Union next year and Angela Merkel has

made battling climate change her top priority. But the chancellor will face the tough task of bringing

the US in line.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel named confronting climate change as her country's top priority as

leader of the Group of Eight (G8) nations next year and will also use Germany's weight as president of

the EU to push for the reduction of energy use at the same time.

Germany's dual role as head of two of the most powerful international bodies in 2007 gives Merkel the

opportunity to mount international efforts to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and put global warming

back on the agenda after Russia played down the issue during its G8 presidency in 2006.

Merkel seemed ready to face the world's biggest polluters when she made her statements earlier this

week to a meeting of conservationists in Berlin and didn't need to name names when she said that

her goal was to "convert the big emitters (of carbon dioxide)."

Merkel faces test to get US into line

That and the announcement that the G8 under Germany's leadership would face the challenge of

climate change amounted to an indirect call for the United States to join in the so-called Kyoto

process. The Kyoto process was designed to take some of the impact out of the climate change that

many experts say is already under way.

Scientists say that if emissions of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide (CO2) -- produced by burning

fossil fuels which trap heat in the atmosphere -- are not curbed, sea levels will rise and drought and

floods will become more frequent, with catastrophic results.

The United States, responsible for one quarter of all man-made greenhouse gas emissions, is the only

G8 member not to have ratified the Kyoto Protocol, which sets mandatory targets for the reduction of

such emissions. Canada, France, Italy, Japan, Russia, and the UK are also members in the

organization of the world's economic powerhouses.


Merkel, a former environment minister who holds a doctorate in physics, told the meeting that any

efforts to stop global warming without the cooperation of "our American partners" were doomed to

failure.

"That means we've certainly got our work cut out for us -- let me say that clearly."

Global warming neglected by G8 agenda

"To prevent global warming, the nations with the largest emissions of gases that are causing climate

change have to take part," Merkel added. "That's why we will make this an important issue once again

on the agenda during our G8 presidency."

"China, India and other countries are now much more aware of the risks," she said. "As a result, the

ground is now more fertile than it once was."

"We urgently need agreements for the period after 2012 when the Kyoto Protocol expires. Germany

will do all it can within its realm as president of both the G8 and the EU ... We have a great chance

next year to have an international impact."

The chancellor added that Germany would continue to play a leading role in improving the efficiency

of energy use.

---------------

1.2. White House Says No Change on US Carbon Strategy

29 September 2006, Planet Ark Reuters

The Bush administration has no plans to ease its opposition to national limits on greenhouse gas

output despite talk that a change may be under consideration, a White House spokeswoman said on

Thursday.

"The president has said continually said that one of reasons he doesn't like a mandated cap is because

it has the potential to move jobs overseas and hurt the economy," said Kristin Hellmer, spokeswoman

for James Connaughton, the chairman of the White House Council on Environmental Quality.

Growing concerns about global warming have prompted California, Arizona and seven Northeastern

states to take steps to bypass President George W. Bush and set their own greenhouse limits.

Bush pulled out of the 163-nation Kyoto Protocol on global warming in 2001, saying it would hurt the

economy and unfairly left rapidly developing countries like China and India without limits on

emissions.

A national cap on emissions would mean heavy industries in the United States, the world's top emitter

of greenhouse gases, might have to make big decisions, like investing in alternative energy or cleanburning

natural gas.

Hellmer said Bush is sticking with his 2002 plan calling for voluntary reductions, with an eye to

trimming greenhouse emissions intensity -- or emissions per unit of economic output of the US

economy -- by 18 percent by 2012.

"If we're not meeting (the emissions intensity) goal, (Bush) has always said he will look at new

policies and new ideas," Hellmer said. "But now we are on track to meet that goal."

Critics of Bush's voluntary greenhouse plan say it is too lenient to industry, especially as overall US

greenhouse gas emissions have risen 13 percent since 1990.

Exploratory team

A source who has worked in the energy profession for decades told Reuters he was approached in

New York last month by a team containing White House staff that was exploring the use of national

regulations on greenhouse emissions.

The source, who declined to be named, said the team, led by an official at the Department of Energy,

was weighing the benefits of three ways to regulate several sources of greenhouse emissions.

"One is for the electric utility industry, one for industrial sources, and another for what they are calling

fuels, or vehicles," said the source, who added he thinks the team was far from making conclusions on

emissions.

A DOE spokeswoman said the department official said to lead the team was not available to comment

on whether he had met with the source to talk about an emissions cap, and said the agency had no

knowledge of such contacts.

The source said talks centered on trying to provide regulatory certainty for businesses by extending

the plan far past Kyoto's first phase, which requires about 40 developed countries to cut emissions

about 5 percent below 1990 levels by 2008 to 2012.

The team has talked about cutting emissions by a yet-to-be-determined amount by 2020 using the

year 2000 as an emissions baseline, the source said.

"It's certainly nothing to do with Kyoto," the source said.


--------------

1.3. Energy efficiency plan hanging in the balance

25 September 2006, ENDS Europe DAILY 2170

The future of an EU action plan on energy efficiency that was due to be adopted this Wednesday, has

been thrown into doubt after European commission president Jose Manuel Barroso raised last-minute

concerns.

The action plan is intended to set out the policies and measures required over six years to achieve the

EU's goal of reducing energy consumption 20 per cent by 2020 (EED 20/09/06

http://www.endseuropedaily.com/21671). As drafted by the commission's energy directorate, these

include revisions to existing EU legislation and new energy savings targets for sectors such as

transport.

News of Mr Barroso's intervention is spreading ripples of alarm. According to a source in the council of

ministers, Mr Barroso is worried that the plan and the actions it proposes are too technical and

bureaucratic, and will fail to register with citizens. More fundamentally, he questions whether a

separate action plan on energy efficiency is necessary at all.

While there is still a possibility that the plan could emerge after a short delay, there is also a strong

chance that it will be dropped entirely, with actions on energy efficiency instead being subsumed into

a wider energy strategy - "including nuclear and fossil fuels", according to one stakeholder - as part of

the common EU energy policy expected early next year (EED 15/03/06

http://www.endseuropedaily.com/20591).

The high level of uncertainty surrounding the future of the plan reflects the fact that the last word

now rests with the commission president, who has yet to make a final decision.

Energy commissioner Andris Piebalgs has repeatedly described energy efficiency as his main priority

(see separate article, this edition). Although his spokesperson sought to play down the significance of

the delay, behind the scenes Mr Piebalgs is fighting to save the action plan. "Piebalgs' point was that

energy efficiency was being forgotten. Now the energy supply lobby is winning back the agenda", one

aggrieved stakeholder told ENDS.

A decision by the commission to shelve the document entirely would lead many to question its

commitment to energy efficiency, and raise concerns over the influence of power industry lobbyists in

the decision. Andrew Warren of European energy efficient buildings lobby EuroAce told ENDS that

such a move would send the signal that a key energy policy priority for the commission "has suddenly

diminished in importance".

------------------

1.4. Shocking Decision: Commission tells EU countries: 'stop subsidising renewable power'

25 September 2006

The European Commission has recently warned an EU Member State, the Grand Duchy of

Luxembourg (and possibly also other EU countries), to reverse its current policy of compensating

electricity customers for the price difference between alternative ( sustainable ) energy and power

produced using traditional fossil fuels.

The Commission has accused Luxembourg of engaging in market distortion , thereby contravening

EU policy, and has warned the Grand Duchy to halt the practice immediately. The European

Environmental Bureau, Europe s largest coalition of environmental NGOs, is informing the

Commission that its warning goes against a fundamental EU aim of encouraging sustainable

development and also undermines the EU s Kyoto objectives.

A resolution to protest at the Commission s action was agreed by EEB members at their Annual

General Meeting in Brussels on 23 September. We call on the Commission immediately to renounce

this policy , said John Hontelez, EEB s Secretary General. Far from punishing those who devise

creative solutions, we must, on the contrary, do all we possibly can to favour the development of

alternative sources of energy. He added, The current situation is deplorable and means that the

Commission would effectively penalise people who take responsibility by obtaining their electricity

needs from sustainable sources. The Commission seems more concerned with protecting major power

generators, to the detriment of the overall environment.

-------------

ENERGY AND EMISSIONS


2.1. Global Bioenergy Partnership Secretariat up, running

25 September 2006

The Secretariat of the Global Bioenergy Partnership (GBEP), launched at the 14th Session of the UN

Commission for Sustainable Development in May 2006 in New York to promote the use of bioenergy,

opened for business here this week.

Located at FAO headquarters and supported by the Italian Ministry for the Environment, Land and

Sea, the Secretariat’s mandate is to facilitate a global political forum to promote bioenergy and to

encourage the production, marketing and use of “green” fuels, with particular focus on developing

countries.

The Secretariat will be the principal coordinator of Partnership communications and activities and will

assist international exchanges of know-how and technology, promote supportive policy frameworks

and identify ways of fostering investments and removing barriers to the development and

implementation of joint projects.

In the short term, the Secretariat will update the inventory of existing networks, initiatives and

institutions dealing with bioenergy and identify any gaps in knowledge. It will also assist the Partners

in identifying and implementing bilateral and multilateral projects for sustainable bioenergy

development and support the formulation of guidelines for measuring reductions in greenhouse gas

emissions due to the use of biofuels.

Renewable energy sources

The Partnership’s overall aim is to respond to the growing need to develop renewable energy sources

in the light of high oil prices, global warming and concerns about diminishing fossil fuel reserves.

FAO has always actively promoted biofuels as a means of reducing poverty while producing clean,

low-cost energy. Given the right technologies, an abundant energy supply could be tapped by

converting biomass such as crop residues, grass, straw and brushwood into fuel, while crops like

sugar cane, corn and soybeans are already being used to produce ethanol or bio-diesel.

“We are happy that FAO was chosen to host the GBEP Secretariat,” said Alexander Müller, FAO

Assistant Director-General for Sustainable Development. “Its presence will stimulate us to continue

helping governments and institutions formulate appropriate bioenergy policies and strategies.”

“We hope the creation of a Global Bioenergy Partnership will help reduce current dependency on oil.

Over the next decades, we will most probably see bioenergy providing an increasing amount of the

world’s energy needs, but we need to assure that this is done in a sustainable manner. Positive

synergies between GBEP and FAO’s International Bioenergy Platform (IBEP) will contribute to an

expanded and sustainable role of biofuels,” said Müller.

Italy and Mexico were respectively appointed as Chair and Vice-Chair of GBEP’s Steering Committee

for the next two years.

*Current Partners of the Global Bioenergy Partnership (GBEP) are: all G8 Countries (Canada, France,

Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, United Kingdom, U.S.A.), China, Mexico, the International Energy

Agency (IEA), the UN Foundation, the European Biomass Industry Association (EUBIA) and FAO.

Online news from FAO: http://www.fao.org/newsroom/

------------------

2.2. Methane emissions soar as China booms

28 September 2006

The explosive growth of the Chinese economy over the past seven years has been linked with a rise in

emissions of man-made methane, a study has found.

Methane is the second most important greenhouse gas and, molecule for molecule, it is about 20

times as potent as carbon dioxide in its ability to exacerbate global warming.

Levels of methane in the atmosphere have risen since the Industrial Revolution but in recent years

they appeared to have stabilised, leading scientists to believe that the gas may not be so critical in

terms of global warming. However, the study found that the decline in methane levels seen during the

1990s was largely the result of the drying out of wetland areas due to climate change, which

suppressed a major natural source of the gas.

This, they found, has masked a significant increase in man-made sources of methane from booming

Asian economies, particularly China, whose economy has more than doubled since 1999.

"The bad news is that the slowdown in global methane emissions in the past few decades was only

temporary - reports of the emissions' control have been greatly exaggerated," said Jos Lelieveld, an

atmospheric scientist at the Max Planck Institute for Chemistry in Mainz, Germany.


The study, published in Nature, was carried out by an international team of researchers which

included Paul Steele of Australia's Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

(CSIRO). "Had it not been for this reduction in methane emissions from wetlands, atmospheric levels

of methane would most likely have continued rising," Dr Steele said.

"This suggests that if the drying trend is reversed and emissions from wetlands return to normal,

atmospheric methane levels may increase again, worsening the problem of climate change," he said.

At present, about two thirds of global methane comes from man-made sources, such as the burning

of fossil fuel, the accidental release during drilling for natural gas or from cattle ranching. Levels

recorded globally can be affected by natural phenomena such as the El Niño ocean current and

volcanic eruptions. They can therefore vary enormously from year to year and from hemisphere to

hemisphere.

The largest natural source of methane comes from the bacterial decomposition of organic matter in

wetlands. Once in the atmosphere, however, the gas can be quickly broken down.

The scientists tried to tease apart the sources of methane using computer simulations of how the gas

is transported in the atmosphere over the past 20 years of atmospheric emissions. They used a

method of tracing sources based on the concentrations of a carbon isotope - methane emissions from

wetlands, for instance, are substantially depleted in this isotope.

Dr Steele and his colleagues showed that the prolonged drying of many wetland regions in the world -

caused by draining and climate change - appears to have resulted in a reduction in the release of

methane. They also found that during the 1990s, the release of man-made methane was also

stemmed by more efficient methods of extracting natural gas. However, the study indicated how the

growth of Asian economies, and resulting rises in fossil fuel use, has led to an upturn in man-made

emissions of methane since about 1999.

Paul Fraser, a senior scientist at CSIRO who has been working on the role of greenhouse gases for

more than 30 years, said the study was important. "What this work demonstrates is that there have

been two opposing processes at work that together have resulted in stable methane emissions and no

increase in atmospheric concentration over the past eight years," Dr Fraser said.

"On the one hand, wetlands have been drying up globally and thus emitting less methane. On the

other, economic growth in the northern hemisphere, especially in China, has generated increasing

amounts of methane from the mining and use of fossil fuels," he said.

"Though it is difficult to predict what will happen to wetlands in the future, it is more than likely that

overall methane levels in the atmosphere will increase in the future, due to increasing demands for

energy."

Professor Neville Nicholls, of Monash University, in Melbourne, said: "Methane is an important

greenhouse gas, and this work is a major step in better understanding why methane emissions are

changing. But the relentless increase in carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels is, and will continue

to be, the most important driver of the global warming that we are witnessing."

-------------------

2.3. Analysis-Economists on climate change: do we care?

26 September 2006, Reuters

Will the spending needed to prevent global warming cost the world more than just sitting back, or

even enjoying the possible financial benefits of a hotter planet?

Economists are divided over that cold financial calculation in the week ahead of a major report on the

issue to be presented to ministers of the world's leading nations.

Some want action now to curb climate-changing emissions, saying that will cost little today but more

if we delay, while others urge a slower approach, saying uncontrolled climate change will cost little or

nothing in the short-term.

The report by UK government scientist Nicholas Stern to the G8 nations and major emerging countries

including China, India and Brazil, may favour the first argument, according to some sources who

contributed to it.

Also in that camp is Nobel laureate and former World Bank chief economist Joseph Stiglitz.

"The net cost (of taking action) is even potentially negative but certainly is not very significant," said

Stiglitz.

Financial benefits, or negative costs, occur from energy efficiency savings.

"We need to start doing something now," Stiglitz said. "There is a risk of very rapid climate change."

Robert Mendelsohn, professor at the Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, argues that

such negative costs may still be less than the benefits.


He sees a net global warming bonus in the near-term, as higher farming yields in northern countries

offsets damage elsewhere, especially in Africa.

"In that sense it doesn't make sense to spend money right now," Mendelsohn said, adding that

beyond 2050 and a 2 degrees celsius rise the damage and need for action grows.

He added that he does not cost species extinctions and health effects, and only crudely measures the

cost of island inundations.

Richard Tol, Senior Research Officer at Ireland's Economic and Social Research Institute, has a similar

stance.

"(My damage estimate) does hide some things that some people will get very upset about," Tol said.

"From an economic perspective small island states are so tiny and people are moving out of there

anyway."

As an example Tol estimates the welfare loss of the Maldives submerging at three times the

inhabitants' annual salaries, in addition to the 100 percent loss of the country's GDP.

Citizens are happy to value the preservation of the global ecosystem at a cost of 50 euros per person

per year, Tol says, but added he does not factor in the risk of rapid sea level rise.

Underestimates

A third camp treats with suspicion both cost and damage estimates, fearing they could be huge

underestimates.

"I worry that existing damage estimates have little to do with what we'll actually see," said John

Reilly, senior research scientist at MIT. "They do not really value the widespread ecological changes

that are likely to occur."

A particular concern is the cost of runaway climate change, where temperature rises spin out of

control, and which could trigger knock-on disasters like conflicts, or sudden sea level rise which could

wipe out part or whole countries like the Netherlands, Egypt and Bangladesh.

On the costs of policies, the concern is of over-optimistic assumptions about the update of new clean

energy technologies, with recent oil price hikes, for example, spurring less adoption impact than some

had expected.

The annual costs of tackling climate change escalate rapidly the tougher the action.

Reilly estimates the cost of staying within a 3 degrees temperature rise at 2 percent of global GDP in

2100, but at some 8 to 10 percent of GDP to stay under 2 degrees -- or some $25 trillion in 2100

money -- seen as a danger threshold.

Mendelsohn estimated that the top end of possible temperature rises, nearly 6 degrees, would cost up

to 2 percent of GDP in 2100.

Britain's Stern will present his findings to ministers in Mexico next week, a month before countries

start talks -- expected to last years -- on a successor to take the Kyoto protocol beyond 2012.

---------------------

2.4. Civil Society Groups criticise World Bank Clean Energy Strategy

24 September 2006, Biores - http://www.ictsd.org/biores/index.htm

Future energy options featured on the agenda of global finance ministers attending the World Bank

and International Monetary Fund (IMF) annual meetings in Singapore from 13-20 September. The

joint IMF-World Bank Development Committee considered progress with regard to the elaboration of

an investment framework for clean energy and development, welcomed progress to date and called

for additional donor funding. However, a number of environment and development NGOs joined

forces to criticise the clean energy plan for "selling the climate and poor people short". They

recommended a much stronger focus on renewable energy, including the creation of a new

Renewable Energy for Development Agency.

Progress report on clean energy investment

One of the major background reports for this year's meetings was "An Investment Framework For

Clean Energy And Development: A Progress Report", which had been commissioned in response to a

mandate from the G-8 summit in Gleneagles in 2005 (see Bridges Trade BioRes, 8 July 2005,

http://www.ictsd.org/biores/05-07-08/story3.htm). The report focuses on steps to achieve

environmentally sustainable electricity development, particularly in Africa, to transition to a lowercarbon

economy and to adapt to climate change. It concludes that the financing gap for the energy

for development and energy access agendas should be met through energy sector policy reform and

to attract the private sector, as well as through public sector funding. It calls for a global regulatory

framework that would support the transition to a low-carbon economy. It also stresses the need for

enhanced adaptation strategies in order to achieve progress in fighting poverty.


Meeting on 18 September, the joint IMF-World Bank Development Committee in its communiqué

welcomed progress made under the clean energy investment framework and asked the Bank to work

with other international organisations to explore financing options to support investment in clean

energy for development and to maximise the use of existing instruments.

NGOs critical of Bank energy efforts

A number of environment and development NGOs, including Friends of the Earth International, the

Institute for Policy Studies and Oil Change International, said, however, that the Investment

Framework on Clean Energy and Development will neither be effective at combating climate change

nor for expanding energy access for the poor. The organisations criticised the framework for raising

USD10 billion for conventional energy that have lower greenhouse gas emissions.

"In continuing to lend for fossil fuel and dam projects, the World Bank has consistently missed the

social and environmental double dividend that renewable energy technologies could bring," said Peter

Bosshard of International Rivers Network. Graham Saul of Oil Change International stressed that "if

the World Bank wants to be a positive force in the fight against climate change then the first step is to

stop subsidising the expansion of the oil industry."

The NGOs instead recommended an approach based on ending subsidies for fossil fuel projects,

increasing efforts to meet the basic energy needs of the poor, and redirecting existing energy

financing to renewable technologies and energy efficiency projects via a new Renewable Energy for

Development Agency.

Additional Resources

To access the World Bank "Investment Framework for Clean Energy and Development: A Progress

Report" see http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DEVCOMMINT/Documentation/...


To access the civil society report on "How the World Bank's Energy Framework Sells the Climate and

Poor People Short," visit http://www.foe.org/camps/intl/EnergyReportDraft091406.pdf.

----------------

CLIMATE IMPACTS

3.1. Severe Impacts of Climate Change on Key Ecosystems Worldwide

28 September 2006, Science for Environment Policy

One of the more worrisome aspects of climate change is the potential major impacts on the world’s

ecosystems. There is increasing evidence that ecological changes have occurred locally during recent

decades as a response to relatively minor climate changes.

A recent British study has quantified the risks of climate induced changes in key ecosystem processes

during the 21st century using innovative methods. They gathered results from 52 simulations of future

world climate scenarios using 16 different computer models to calculate the probabilities for changes

in forest cover, and for severe shifts in the frequency of wildfires and freshwater supplies over the

next 100 years.

The results suggest that areas such as Eurasia, eastern China, Canada, Central America and Amazonia

could experience important forest loss. The risk of forest losses in some parts of Eurasia, Amazonia

and Canada are over 40% for temperature increases of above 3°C. The authors also found that most

semiarid regions, central Asia, southern Africa and the western US, and much of South America, show

a high probability of increasing wildfires, especially for temperature increases above 3°C.

Furthermore, areas of western Africa, southern Europe, Central America, the eastern United States

and the Middle East are at most risk from decreasing freshwater supplies and droughts as a result of

rising temperatures.

The authors also highlight that at any temperature increase of more than 3°C, the amount of carbon

that plants absorb is likely to be less than the amount that is released into the atmosphere as carbon

dioxide by decomposing dead biomass. This would result in land "carbon sinks" becoming a source of

CO2 as the stored carbon would be released into the atmosphere, exacerbating the problem of global

warming.

This research represents an important first step towards quantifying the risks of damaging impacts

associated with particular levels of global warming on worldwide ecosystems. An important finding of

this study is that small increases in temperature could rapidly result in more pronounced damage to

ecosystems.


Source: Scholze M et al. (2006) « A climate change risk analysis for world ecosystems », PNAS

103(35):13116-13120. Contact:marko.scholze@bristol.ac.uk

----------------

3.2. U.S. blocked hurricane report, journal says

26 September 2006, Associated Press

A federal agency has blocked release of a report that suggests global warming is contributing to the

frequency and strength of hurricanes, the journal Nature reported Tuesday.

The possibility that warming conditions may cause storms to become stronger has generated debate

among climate and weather experts, particularly in the wake of the Hurricane Katrina disaster.

In the new case, Nature said weather experts at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

— part of the Commerce Department — in February set up a seven-member panel to prepare a

consensus report on the views of agency scientists about global warming and hurricanes.

According to the reporting by Nature, a draft of the statement said that warming may be having an

effect.

In May, when the report was expected to be released, panel chair Ants Leetmaa received an e-mail

from a Commerce official saying the report needed to be made less technical and was not to be

released, Nature reported.

Leetmaa, head of NOAA’s Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory in New Jersey, did not immediately

respond to calls seeking comment.

NOAA spokesman Jordan St. John said he had no details of the report.

NOAA Administrator Conrad Lautenbacher is currently out of the country, but Nature quoted him as

saying the report was merely an internal document and could not be released because the agency

could not take an official position on the issue.

However, the journal said in its online report that the study was merely a discussion of the current

state of hurricane science and did not contain any policy or position statements.

A series of studies over the past year or so have shown an increase in the power of hurricanes in the

Atlantic and Pacific oceans, a strengthening that many storm experts say is tied to rising sea-surface

temperatures.

Just two weeks ago, researchers said that most of the increase in ocean temperature that feeds more

intense hurricanes is a result of human-induced global warming, a study one researcher said “closes

the loop” between climate change and powerful storms like Katrina.

Not all agree, however, with opponents arguing that many other factors affect storms, which can

increase and decrease in cycles.

The possibility of global warming affecting hurricanes is politically sensitive because the administration

has resisted proposals to restrict release of gases that can cause warming conditions.

In February, a NASA political appointee who worked in the space agency’s public relations department

resigned after reportedly trying to restrict access to Jim Hansen, a NASA climate scientist who has

been active in global warming research.

Hansen was the lead author of another research paper published this week that concluded that

human-caused global warming was nearing "dangerous" levels.

------------------

CONFERENCES

4.1. 7th Annual WADE Decentralized Energy Conference Expo & Annual Meeting

30 – 31 October 2006, Prague Czech Republic

More information: https://www.synergyregistrations.com/Registrations/wade2006/.

---------------

4.2. Energy Independence powered by Wind

The 5th World Wind Energy Conference & Exhibition WWEC 2006 held in New Delhi, India, 6-8

November 2006.

The WWEC 2006 Programme is now available on the conference website

www.wwec2006.com/prg.html.

Register now at http://www.wwec2006.com/registration.html.

The full WWEC 2006 programme and further information is available at www.wwec2006.com.

-----------------


4.3. Carbon Market Insights 2007

13 - 15 March 2007, Copenhagen, Denmark

This year’s event will reflect on, amongst other major issues, the opening up of the EU emissions

trading scheme to the global carbon markets.

Please see the following link to the preliminary programme for an overview of the conference,

delegate fees and exhibition opportunities:

http://www.pointcarbon.com/getfile.php/fileelement_87796/Carbon_Market_Insights_2007_programm

e_web.pdf.

Online registration for Carbon Market Insights 2007 is now available at

http://www.pointcarbon.com/Events/Carbon%20Market%20Insights/category401.html. Here you will

also find news and updates on the conference, such as details on delegate prices,

sponsoring/exhibition opportunities, workshops and other information.

----------------

ANNOUNCEMENTS

5.1. Invitation for comments – JI project in Bulgaria

DNV Certification is currently making a determination of the Reduction of greenhouse gases by

gasification of Burgas Municipality project in Bulgaria. The project, proposed as Joint Implementation

(JI) project between Bulgaria and Denmark, is a energy project, where the project proponent aims at

the reduction of greenhouse gases (GHG) in Burgas municipality by fuel switch from liquid and solid

fuels and electricity, used by industrial, public and administrative consumers and households to

natural gas and by enhancement of the energy efficiency of their combustion installations.

We herewith invite comments from Parties, stakeholders and observers in accordance with the JI rules

and modalities. Comments may be provided during a period of 30 days until 25 October 2006 on the

DNV Climate Change webpage http://www.dnv.com/certification/ClimateChange/. After that the

project is closed for comments, but the project documentation is still available for review.

-----------------

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

More magazines by this user
Similar magazines