Church Leaders Warn of Eroding Commitment to Better Climate
Episcopal News Service. April 7, 1995 [95063]
(ENI) A World Council of Churches representative at the Berlin Climate Change summit recently warned that industrialized countries are preparing a secret deal that will represent "a betrayal of their ethical responsibility."
David Hallman, coordinator of the 15-member WCC team at the summit, said that "if the deal went through, it would result in an extremely severe loss of momentum for the convention [on climate change], time that we cannot afford to lose given the known impact of climate change that small island peoples are already beginning to experience."
The proposed deal would mean that there would be no reference to the "goal of reductions" of greenhouse gas emissions by industrialized countries, according to Hallman. The WCC and other non-governmental organizations (NGOs), as well as the Alliance of Small Island States, have called on industrialized countries to agree to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 20 percent by the year 2005.
G-24, a negotiating committee comprised of representatives of 24 industrialized and developing countries, was set up to try to reach agreement after a week of deadlock in the face of the refusal by industrialized countries, led by the United States, to agree to reductions in their carbon dioxide emissions. According to Hallman, G-24 members have been forbidden from talking to people outside the G-24 about the progress of negotiations. But he said that, according to "reliable information" leaked to NGOs, the industrialized countries, in particular the United States and Australia, were presenting developing countries represented at the G-24 meeting with a "take-it-or-leave-it" position.
Christine Von Weizsaecker, a German scientist who was part of the WCC delegation, reported that the industrialized countries were preparing to export nuclear technology to developing countries as a means of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The transfer of nuclear technology to developing countries could take place as part of a controversial scheme known as "joint initiatives," which is currently under discussion in Berlin.
"What industrialized countries interested in nuclear technology will do is to make a link between reduction targets and joint implementation plus technology transfer, without excluding the nuclear option. I think the nuclear option will only be mentioned after we have the Non-Proliferation Treaty signed in the near future," Von Weizsaecker said.
Von Weizsaecker pointed to remarks made at a press conference by the president of the Federation of German Industry, Hans-Olaf Henkel, in which "he very strongly pushed the nuclear option and added to his written text the words: 'The instrument of joint initiatives must be seen in this context.'"
"I wouldn't like to see within 10 years a tragic situation where we will have to choose between climate threats such as flooding, desertification, hurricanes, on the one hand, and nuclear threats on the other," Von Weizsaecker said. She called for investment in "least cost planning, in co-generation, in renewables and demand-side measures."
Henkel said that "in 1994, 432 nuclear power stations in 30 countries generated enough electricity to avoid 2.2 billion tons of carbon dioxide -- that is ten percent of global carbon dioxide emissions. Without a substantial contribution from nuclear energy there is no prospect of success in reducing carbon dioxide emissions, either in Germany or globally."
Rafe Pomerance, the U.S. negotiator at the Berlin conference, declined to speculate on whether joint initiative agreements would allow the export of nuclear technology by Germany or Japan.