Marcin Korolec, chair of the U.N. climate change talks in Warsaw, fired by Polish government for not speeding up regulations for expanding fracking

Marcin Korolec, chair of the U.N. climate change talks in Warsaw that run through Friday, was sacked from his job as Polish environment minister on Wednesday, reportedly for failing to speed up regulations to expand shale gas exploitation. (Alik Keplicz, Associated Press, November 20, 2013)

by Carol J. Williams, Los Angeles Times, November 20, 2013

Expectations of progress were already low for the United Nations climate conference in Poland this week, but few delegates were probably prepared for the latest stumbles.

Ten days into Poland's role as host of the two-week U.N. gathering, Prime Minister Donald Tusk on Wednesday fired the conference president, Environment Minister Marcin Korolec, Polskie Radio and other national media reported.

Tusk clarified later that Korolec would continue representing Poland in the climate talks through the country's stint in the rotating presidency that runs through the end of 2014.

But climate change activists warned that Korolec's loss of government backing undermines his clout in pressing delegates to commit to emissions reductions.

"At such a crucial time, this shows how little interest the Polish government has in reaching a deal at the climate talks," Friends of the Earth campaigner Urszula Stefanowicz told Bloomberg after Tusk's Cabinet shuffle. "Korolec will have no real political power."

Worse, said Greenpeace Poland director Maciej Muskat, Tusk said he was replacing Korolec to speed up development of Poland's shale gas industry.

"This is nuts," Muskat said of the government shake-up in the middle of the huge U.N. meeting. "Furthermore, justifying the change of minister by the need to push the exploitation of another fossil fuel in Poland is beyond words."

The Warsaw meeting of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, which began Nov. 11, has also been marred by the Polish government's simultaneous hosting of a coal industry conference and a walkout staged Tuesday by developing nations.

China, India, South Africa and Brazil, among others, insist the initial burden of reducing greenhouse gases should be on the United States and Europe, where rapid industrialization in past centuries created the global warming trend.

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon addressed the Warsaw gathering Wednesday to urge member state finance ministers to make conversion to renewable energy sources a priority.

"This can do more than anything to unlock the huge investment necessary for climate change adaptation and mitigation," Ban said of the need to replace fossil fuels with clean energy sources by 2020. "We must send the right policy signals."

The Warsaw meeting was intended to make progress toward a 2015 agreement on specific reductions to be made by member states to reach the goal of cutting greenhouse gases to 20% below their 1990 levels by the end of this decade.

A meeting of the climate group in Copenhagen in 2009 ended without agreement after similar disputes over specific carbon reduction commitments.

http://www.latimes.com/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-poland-un-climate-minister-sacked-20131120,0,4627573.story

Global environment and civil society groups have dramatically walked out of the United Nations COP19 climate change talks in Warsaw

by Graham Readfearn, DeSmogBlog, November 20, 2013

LEADING global environment and civil society groups have dramatically walked out of the United Nations COP19 climate change talks in Warsaw in an unprecedented move in UNFCCC conference history.

The talks in Warsaw have been dogged by uncertainty and a lack of progress, with campaign groups complaining daily of blocking tactics and buck-passing by many governments.

Groups including Greenpeace International, WWF, Oxfam International, ActionAid International, Friends of the Earth Europe and the International Trade Union Confederation joined the walkout.

Losing patience with the Warsaw talks, the groups accused governments of putting the interests of the “dirty energy lobby” first and of failing to address a global “climate crisis”.

In a statement, the groups said: “enough is enough” but some stressed they were not walking away from the UNFCCC process entirely, promising to return for the talks in Lima, Peru, in 2014.

The statement said: “The Warsaw Climate Conference, which should have been an important step in the just transition to a sustainable future, is on track to deliver virtually nothing. “In fact, the actions of many rich countries here in Warsaw are directly undermining the UNFCCC itself, which is an important multilateral process that must succeed if we are to fix the global climate crisis.”

The groups were preparing to speak to media and delegates inside Poland’s National Stadium before collectively walking out, handing in their official UNFCC badges.

Winnie Byanyima, Executive Director of Oxfam International, said: “Oxfam is walking out of these talks because governments need to know enough is enough. People around the globe have a right to know about the desperate state of these negotiations.

“The stakes are too high to allow governments to make a mockery of these talks. Climate change means real and harmful impacts on people right around the globe. “It means people losing their lives, homes and livelihoods in floods and typhoons. It means people going hungry because crops have failed and food prices have sky rocketed. This is happening today - without action there will be worse to come tomorrow.

“Government’s primary responsibility is the security of their people. They are failing in this responsibility. They must draw a line under the Warsaw talks and come back in 2014 ready for meaningful discussions on how they will deliver their share of the emissions reductions which scientists say are needed and their share of the money needed to help the poorest and most vulnerable countries adapt.”

“We must demand action together - without this pressure our governments will simply not deliver what is needed.”

Samantha Smith, leader of WWF's global climate and energy initiative, said: "We have been forced to take this action because of the failure of governments to take these talks seriously.

“We are not walking away from the UN process on climate change, just this conference in Warsaw, where the interests of the most polluting industries have been set above the needs of global citizens.

"Talks like these amount to nothing if countries refuse to come to them and negotiate in good faith or worse, try to drag the process backwards. There comes a point where the only option is to say enough is enough and to leave. With the science clearer than ever on the risk posed by dangerous climate change, heads of state need to step in and show leadership and drive this process forward.”

Kumi Naidoo, executive director of Greenpeace, addressing the media about the walkout. Photo credit: Brendan DeMelle, DeSmogBlog


350.org co-founder Jamie Henn is interviewed by Democracy Now on the walkout. Photo credit: Brendan DeMelle, DeSmogBlog


Photo credit: Brendan DeMelle, DeSmogBlog

Below is the statement from environment and civil society groups in full:

Enough is enough

We have said we stand in solidarity with the millions impacted by Typhoon Haiyan, and with all climate impacted people. Our solidarity compels us to tell the truth about COP 19 – the Warsaw Climate Conference. The Warsaw Climate Conference, which should have been an important step in the just transition to a sustainable future, is on track to deliver virtually nothing. In fact, the actions of many rich countries here in Warsaw are directly undermining the UNFCCC itself, which is an important multilateral process that must succeed if we are to fix the global climate crisis.

The Warsaw Conference has put the interests of dirty energy industries over that of global citizens - with a “Coal & Climate Summit” being held in conjunction; corporate sponsorship from big polluters plastered all over the venue; and a Presidency (Poland) that is beholden to the coal and fracking industry. When Japan announced that it was following Canada and backtracking on emission cut commitments previously made, and Australia gave multiple signals that it was utterly unwilling to take the UN climate process seriously, the integrity of the talks was further jeopardized.

This week saw a “finance ministerial” with almost no actual finance, and loss and damage talks that have stalled because rich countries refuse to engage on the substance of an international mechanism. Warsaw has not seen any increase in emission reductions nor increased support for adaptation before 2020 – on these things it has actually taken us backward. And a clear pathway to a comprehensive and fair agreement in Paris 2015 is missing. We as civil society are ready to engage with ministers and delegations who actually come to negotiate in good faith. But at the Warsaw Conference, rich country governments have come with nothing to offer. Many developing country governments are also struggling and failing to stand up for the needs and rights of their people.

It is clear that if countries continue acting in this way, the next two days of negotiations will not deliver the climate action the world so desperately needs.

Therefore, organizations and movements representing people from every corner of the Earth have decided that the best use of our time is to voluntarily withdraw from the Warsaw climate talks. Instead, we are now focusing on mobilizing people to push our governments to take leadership for serious climate action.

We will work to transform our food and energy systems at a national and global level and rebuild a broken economic system to create a sustainable and low-carbon economy with decent jobs and livelihoods for all. And we will put pressure on everyone to do more to realize this vision.

Coming out of the Warsaw Climate Conference, it is clear that without such pressure, our governments cannot be trusted to do what the world needs. We will return with the voice of the people in Lima to hold our governments accountable to the vision of 

http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/11/21/environment-groups-walkout-warsaw-cop19-climate-change-talks 

CFACT Climate change denier Marc Morano in Warsaw at COP19

This is the type of stuff we are up against

Will extreme weather like super typhoon Haiyan become the new norm?

The strongest hurricanes are becoming stronger, fueled by warmer oceans caused by climate change

by Dana Nuccitelli, "Climate Consensus -- The 97%," The Guardian, November 20, 2013

Typhoon Haiyan over the Leyte Gulf, east of the central Philippines. Photograph: Zuma/Rex Features

Typhoon Haiyan may have been the strongest storm ever recorded; a fact that has triggered an array of stories discussing its possible links to climate change.

Global Warming Fuels Hurricanes

Climate scientists are confident in three ways that climate change will make the impacts of hurricanes worse. First, global warming causes sea level rise, which amplifies storm surges and flooding associated with hurricanes. As a paper published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences by Aslak Grinsted and colleagues concluded,

"we have probably crossed the threshold where Katrina magnitude hurricane surges are more likely caused by global warming than not."

Second, as climate scientist Kevin Trenberth has noted, global warming has also increased the amount of moisture in the air, causing more rainfall and amplifying flooding during hurricanes.

Third, warmer oceans are fuel for hurricanes. Research has shown that the strongest hurricanes have grown stronger in most ocean basins around the world over the past several decades, and climate models consistently project that this trend will continue. Chris Mooney recently documented the past decade's worth of monster hurricanes around the world, and Jeff Masters estimates that 6 of the 13 strongest tropical cyclones on record at landfall have happened since 1998.

The 13 strongest tropical cyclones at landfall. 6 have happened since 1998. Source: wunderground.com

What about Typhoon Intensity Near the Philippines?

Chapter 2.6.3 of the 2013 IPCC report notes,

"Time series of cyclone indices such as power dissipation ... show upward trends in the North Atlantic and weaker upward trends in the western North Pacific since the late 1970s"

The hurricane intensity trend in the western North Pacific (where the Philippines are located) isn't crystal clear. One recent paper finds that over the past few decades their intensity has slightly fallen (but has grown for the planet as a whole), while others suggest it's slightly risen, or that there are fewer but stronger hurricanes in that western North Pacific region.

However, a paper published earlier this year in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences by MIT hurricane expert Kerry Emanuel found that future "Increases in tropical cyclone activity are most prominent in the western North Pacific." So while we're not certain about the trend over the past few decades, the evidence indicates that hurricanes near the Philippines will both become stronger and form more frequently in a warmer world.

Hurricane Frequency Used to Sow Doubt

The frequency of hurricane formation overall is another story. To this point the evidence does not indicate that hurricanes are forming or making landfall more often than in the past, nor are climate scientists confident how global hurricane frequency will change. Thus it's not a surprise that climate contrarians have focused on hurricane frequency while ignoring hurricane intensity. This is a clear sign of bias by writers like the Mail on Sunday's David Rose, who even went as far as to once again repeat the myth of a global warming 'pause' (a myth that was comprehensively debunked by a new study last week).

Similarly, in a piece published in The Guardian Political Science section, Roger Pielke, Jr., criticized President Obama, climate scientist Michael Mann, and others for linking extreme weather to climate change. Pielke lamented that those he criticized didn't reference the 2012 IPCC special report on extreme weather (SREX). However, Pielke's reading of that report was very selective.

Climate Change Intensifies Many Types of Extreme Weather

The IPCC SREX emphasizes that hurricane data include significant uncertainties. However, it's important to note that absence of evidence is not the same as evidence of absence. For example the fact that the data aren't good enough to confidently link rising hurricane intensity to human greenhouse gas emissions so far doesn't mean there isn't a link. It means we need better data to make a conclusive determination.

However, the report does note that several types of extreme weather will intensify as climate change continues:

"Heavy rainfalls associated with tropical cyclones are likely to increase with continued warming."

"Average tropical cyclone maximum wind speed is likely to increase."

"There is medium confidence that some regions of the world have experienced more intense and longer droughts ... There ismedium confidence that droughts will intensify in the 21st century in some seasons and areas ... This applies to regions including southern Europe and the Mediterranean region, central Europe, central North America, Central America and Mexico, northeast Brazil, and southern Africa."

"It is virtually certain that increases in the frequency and magnitude of warm daily temperature extremes and decreases in cold extremes will occur in the 21st century at the global scale. It is very likely that the length, frequency, and/or intensity of warm spells or heat waves will increase over most land areas."

When considering all the available evidence, most of the comments about climate change and extreme weather criticized by Pielke were on solid scientific footing. It's important that we face up to not just the changes in extreme weather that we've seen so far, but those which are soon to come if we continue on our current path. It's not so much the climate change we've seen so far that we're worried about; it's what's yet to come.

What Do We Do About It?

Some climate contrarians have claimed that climate realists are exploiting the victims of Haiyan by discussing the link between hurricanes and climate change. But it was Yeb Saño, the Philippines' lead negotiator to this year's United Nations climate talks who pleaded that we stop procrastinating in addressing climate change.

As Michael Mann noted, we can't say for sure what impact climate change had on Haiyan because we only have one planet, and we're running a dangerous experiment with it. But it's important to ask the right questions when it comes to extreme events like Haiyan. Asking if global warming caused Haiyan is the wrong question.

Human-caused climate change makes the impacts of these storms and many other types of extreme weather worse. It fuels hurricanes such that we'll see superstorms like Haiyan more frequently in the future. Eventually we'll have to stop denying that reality and start doing something to address it, or these types of extreme weather events will become the new norm.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2013/nov/20/climate-change-haiyan-hurricanes

Christiana Figueres tells coal executives they must leave it in the ground (in Warsaw at COP19)

Full speech by UN climate chief Christiana Figueres to World Climate and Coal summit in Warsaw

from rtcc.org, November 18, 2013

(Pic: UNFCCC)

Your Excellency, Mr. Deputy Prime Minister, Honourable Member of the European Parliament, Distinguished Chair of the World Coal Association, Ladies and Gentlemen, I appreciate the opportunity to address the International Coal and Climate Summit in a frank and honest exchange on the transition to a low-emission economy.

Let me be clear from the outset that my joining you today is neither a tacit approval of coal use, nor a call for the immediate disappearance of coal. But I am here to say that coal must change rapidly and dramatically for everyone’s sake.

There are some who, deeply concerned about the devastating effects of climate change already felt by vulnerable populations around the world, are calling for the immediate shut down of all coal plants. There are others who think that coal does not have to change at all, that we can continue to extract and burn as we have done in the past.

The first view does not take into account the immediate needs of nations looking to provide reliable energy to rapidly growing populations in pursuit of economic development and poverty eradication. The second view does not take into account the immediate need for climate stability on this planet, necessary for the wellbeing of present and future generations.

Today I want to set out an alternative path that is admittedly not easy, but is undoubtedly necessary. That path must acknowledge the past, consider the present and chart a path towards an acceptable future for all. I join you today to discuss this path for two reasons. First, the energy sector is an intrinsic component of a sustainable future. And second, the coal industry must change and you are decision makers who have the knowledge and power to change the way the world uses coal.

The path forward begins in the past, recognizing that coal played a key role in the history of our economic development. From heating to transportation to the provision of electricity, coal has undoubtedly enabled much of our progress over the last 200 years. Coal was at the heart of the developed world’s Industrial Revolution and brought affordable energy to the developing world.

However, while society has benefitted from coal-fuelled development, we now know there is an unacceptably high cost to human and environmental health. The science is clear. The IPCC Fifth Assessment Report outlines our predicament. We are at unprecedented GHG concentrations in the atmosphere; our carbon budget is half spent. If we continue to meet energy needs as we have in the past, we will overshoot the internationally agreed goal to limit warming to less than two degree Celsius.

AR5 is not science fiction, it is science fact. AR5 is the overwhelming consensus of 200 lead authors synthesizing the work of 600 scientists who analysed 9000 peer-reviewed publications. AR5 is arguably the most rigorous scientific report ever written. And, the findings of the AR5 have been endorsed by 195 governments, including all of those in which you operate.

There is no doubt that the science is a clarion call for the rapid transformation of the coal industry. Just this morning, more than 25 leading climate and energy scientists from around the world released a clear statement about the need to radically rethink coal’s place in our energy mix.

Considering that coal energy loads the atmosphere with greenhouse gasses, competes for water and impacts public health, the call of science has already been answered by a wide gamut of stakeholders: Students, faith-based organizations and citizens are asking their investment managers to divest from coal and other fossil fuels. Cities choked by air pollution are limiting the burning of coal. Development banks have stopped funding unabated coal.

Commercial financial institutions are analysing the implications of unburnable carbon for their investment strategies. Pricing of GHG emissions is on the rise, evidenced by trading markets coming online around the globe. And, international policy is moving us toward a global low-emission economy. All of this tells me that the coal industry faces a business continuation risk that you can no longer afford to ignore.

Like any other industry, you have a fiduciary responsibility to your workforce and your shareholders. Like any other industry, you are subject to the major political, economic and social shifts of our time. And by now it should be abundantly clear that further capital expenditures on coal can go ahead only if they are compatible with the two degree Celsius limit.

Ladies and gentlemen, the coal industry has the opportunity to be part of the worldwide climate solution by responding proactively to the current paradigm shift. It would be presumptuous of me to put forward a transition plan for coal as you are the repositories of knowledge and experience, and the assets you manage are at stake.

But there are some fundamental parameters of this transition:

-Close all existing subcritical plants;
-Implement safe CCUS on all new plants, even the most efficient;
-Leave most existing reserves in the ground.

These are not marginal or trivial changes, these are transformations that go to the core of the coal industry, and many will say it simply cannot be done. But the phrase “where there’s a will, there’s a way” is tantamount to human history because will precedes innovation, and innovation precedes transformation. John F. Kennedy called for putting man on the moon in ten years at a point when no one knew how that would be done.

We must transform coal with the same determination, the same perseverance, the same will. We must be confident that if we set an ambitious course to low-emissions, science and technology will rapidly transform systems. Above all, you must invest in this potential, because the coal industry has the most to gain by leveraging the existing capital, knowledge and capacity to transform itself. The world is rising to meet the climate challenge as risks of inaction mount, and it is in your best interest to make coal part of the solution. These radical changes have the transformative power to bring coal in line with the direction in which society is moving.

I urge every coal company to honestly assess the financial risks of business as usual; anticipate increasing regulation, growing finance restrictions and diminishing public acceptance; and leverage technology to reduce emissions across the entire coal value chain. You are here today as coal industry leaders, but you can also understand yourselves as long-term energy supply leaders. Some major oil, gas and energy technology companies are already investing in renewables, and I urge those of you who have not yet started to join them.

By diversifying your portfolio beyond coal, you too can produce clean energy that reduces pollution, enhances public health, increases energy security and creates new jobs. By diversifying beyond coal, you reduce the risk of stranded assets and make yourselves ready to reap the rewards of a green economy. By diversifying beyond coal, you can deploy your disciplined, courageous and technically skilled workforce into new renewable energy jobs, transforming your companies from within.

The Warsaw Communique is a first step for change because it shows:

-That the Association accepts climate change as a development risk; and
-That lower coal emissions is an aspirational and realizable goal.

The communique is a first step, but it cannot be the last. I invite you to use this Climate and Coal Summit to decide how you are going to step up to the challenge of contributing to real climate change solutions. We must urgently take the steps that put us on an ambitious path to global peaking by the end of this decade, and zero-net emissions by the second half of the century.

Steps that look past next quarter’s bottom line and see next generation’s bottom line, and steps to figure health, security and sustainability into the bottom line. For it will be your children and my children, our grandchildren and their grandchildren who will look back at today and judge our collective commitment to them.

They must be able to look back and recognize this summit as a historic turning point for the coal industry.

http://www.rtcc.org/2013/11/18/figueres-tells-coal-leave-most-existing-reserves-in-the-ground/

The truth!?! You can't handle the truth!!! OK, we are heading for 4 °C temperature rise, and world leaders are doing nothing

Warsaw Day 6: Prepare now for 4 °C rise

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

by Paul Brown in Warsaw at COP19, Climate News Network, November 16, 2013

Paul Brown, a Climate News Network editor, is in the Polish capital, host of the UN climate talks – the 19th Conference of the Parties of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Continuing his coverage of COP 19, he reports on the warning of heat to come given by a scientist to a fringe meeting.

UN bodies and health authorities are being advised to prepare for a world temperature rise of 4 °C because scientists no longer believe that politicians are capable of holding the temperature rise below the internationally agreed limit, 2 °C above pre-industrial levels.

Mark Maslin, professor of climatology at University College in London, was speaking at a conference here which also heard that some parts of the world were already in danger of becoming too hot for humans to inhabit.

Science and health professionals were invited by the Global Climate and Health Alliance to assess this bleak future for the human race at the end of the first week of climate talks, where little progress has been made to slow global warming.

Wrong kind of politicians

Professor Maslin said: “We are already planning for a 4 °C world because that is where we are heading. I do not know of any scientists who do not believe that. We are just not tackling the enormity of the task we face to keep it below the agreed 2 °C danger threshold.

“If we had the kind of politicians we really need we could still put in place policies that can save the planet from going over the danger level. But there is no evidence at the moment that we have that quality of politicians, so we all have to be prepared for the most likely scenario, which is a 4 °C rise in temperature. If we do not prepare to adapt we simply won't be able to.”

Professor Maslin said that scientists were in a Catch 22 situation. They wanted to tell politicians that it was still possible to save the planet and had shown how to do it in the last Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report, released in September. At the same time scientists were aware that there was not the political appetite to deal with the problem.

He said all UN bodies were now being advised to prepare for a rise of 4 °C, because there is no evidence to show that the world is prepared to turn away from the present pathway of rising carbon emissions.

Currently the temperature has risen 0.8 °C on pre-industrial levels, and with the increase this year to 400 parts per million of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere it will rise further towards the 2 °C threshold.

Professor Maslin said: “I think everybody outside the scientific arena has underestimated the size of the problem.”  The average American emits 16 tons of carbon dioxide a year, the average UK citizen 8 tons and the average Chinese 5 tons.

Every country, he said, had to reduce their citizens' emissions to 2 tons per person to avoid dangerous climate change. “That is a big ask, particularly for a country like China which is still growing fast.”

Dr. Liz Hanna, from the Australian National University’s National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, said parts of her country were already reaching the threshold° where it was impossible for normal life to continue because of the heat.

Killing their workers

She said the Australian Government was ignoring climate change and still expecting places like Darwin to expand. But that was unlikely because they would soon become untenable.  “If employers ask people to continue to work in temperatures above 37 °C, they will be killing them in increasing numbers,” she said.

Dr Hanna said humans were well suited to living in cool conditions and felt comfortable in temperatures between 20 °C and 23 °C because their muscles produced heat from within.

But in parts of Arizona, Australia and India temperatures were reaching -- and for days staying above -- the thermal maximum of endurance, which was around 37 °C, the core heat of the human body.  Above that temperature, and sometimes below, depending on the combination of heat, humidity and air speed, keeping cool put too much strain on the heart and people began to die.

She said that she was studying how human societies could survive such daytime temperatures and continue to work. “There could be some night working, or people could work, rest in cool rooms, and then work again, but their productivity would drop and it would be economically unviable to have factories or farms in such conditions.”

Her researches were focusing on how to keep essential services like farming, police, ambulance, district nurses, construction and mining going in a warming world. “Obviously these people will be risking their lives if they continue to try and work outside when the ambient temperature is above 37 °C,” she said.

Warsaw - Day 3: World faces more 'perfect storms'

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

by Paul Brown in Warsaw, Climate News Network, November 13, 2013

One of the Climate News Network editors, Paul Brown, is in the Polish capital, host of the UN climate talks – the 19th Conference of the Parties (COP 19) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. His latest report describes records continuing to tumble as sea levels rise and warming continues in 2013.
The world continues to heat up in 2013, with regional temperature records being broken and sea level rise accelerating, the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) says in its latest report, Provisional Statement on Status of Climate in 2013.

Sea level rise was particularly significant in the Pacific around the Philippines and had contributed greatly to the devastation caused by the super-typhoon Haiyan, Jerry Lengoasa, deputy general secretary general of the WMO, said here.

The population should have been warned about the tsunami effect of a seven-metre storm surge caused by the typhoon, he said, so that they could have been better prepared to retreat to higher ground.

With the typhoon season not over yet there had already been 30 named storms in the Pacific this year; this was above the average of the last three decades.

Mr Lengoasa said: “What the science tells us is not that there will be more storms, but that the storms we do have will be more violent. ‘Perfect storms,’ if we can call them that, like hurricane Sandy last year and typhoon Haiyan this year will become the normal.”

Sea level had risen a third of a metre in the central Philippine area since 1901, making the area much more vulnerable to storm surges. The average sea level rise round the globe was much lower but was speeding up, and was now 3.2 millimetres a year. This is double the annual average of the last century, i.e., 1.6 mm.

Australian heatwave

Mr Lengoasa made special mention of the unprecedented heatwave in Australia, which had the hottest month ever observed in January 2013, and the hottest summer on record. On January 7th, a new national averaged daily maximum for Australia was set at 40.3 °C, and Moomba in South Australia reached 49.6 °C.

At the same time as Mr Lengoasa was speaking the Australian Government was being attacked in a nearby meeting for watering down its commitments to tackle climate change.

The German organisation Climate Analytics said that Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s plans to dismantle the current climate legislation in his country could lead to Australia increasing emissions in 2020 rather than meeting its target of reducing them by 5% on their 2000 levels.

Even the 5% target was inadequate and consistent with an increasing global temperature rise of 3.5 to 4 °C, well above the 2 °C danger level that world leaders have agreed must not be exceeded.  Climate Analytics claimed that under the Abbott plan emissions would increase by 12% by 2020.

Australia 'the new climate pariah'

Bill Hare, director of Climate Analytics, said: “The existing legislation would have bent the relentless upward curve of Australian emissions downwards, a first step towards a low carbon, climate-safe future. The new policy will see this dismantled and replaced by a climate policy that goes against the science.”

An Australian climate campaigner for Climate Action Network, Julie-Anne Richards, said her country was the new pariah in climate action. “Even the United States and China take more action in fighting climate change than Australia,” she said.

Mr Lengoasa’s presentation was a summary of the weather statistics up to the end of September this year. He said that the year was on course to be among the ten hottest years ever recorded, and warmer than both 2011 and 2012. “It looks as if after a dip during the La Niña episodes, the temperatures are rising again,” he said, cautioning that the statistics were for nine months only.

The year had also been notable for regional floods and droughts. In South America, much below average temperature was recorded in north-east Brazil, where parts of the region suffered their worst drought in 50 years. The Brazilian plateau, the monsoon region of South America received the least rainfall since records began in 1979. The southern African countries of Angola and Namibia “were gripped by one of the worst droughts in the past 30 years.”

At the other extreme in Europe Germany, Poland, the Czech Republic, Austria and Switzerland had intense and extended flooding in late May and early June, and the West African summer monsoon brought welcome rainfall over most of central and western parts of the Sahel.