Climate change has not taken time off -- BUT WHY DO YOU NEED COP26 TO UNDERTAKE DEEP EMISSIONS REDUCTION? The facts are clear, take action. @JMauskar @n_thanki @draghunandan @ClimateJustInfo @KanitkarT @3rdworldnetwork @bforboseman
US and EU are the only two nation/groups with asset holdings above the global per capita average -- the richest. You have already consumed the bulk of the global carbon budget for 1.5 degree warming -- 61 per cent of the 4/5 ths that has already heated the planet.
You ask for "keeping 1.5 alive" but your NDCs are not even 2 deg compatible. If it is Article6 that is the concern, what are you going to get out of the bulk of the rest of the world, that is going to get by on a pittance of all resources, carbon or otherwise?
The money is not with most countries. You need only a short meeting of the rich countries to beef up climate finance. Show the world the money -- and I am sure agreement on modalities will follow.
Climate has not taken time off. But it is the rich who have, all these years, and your urgency is felt only when the rest are reeling under the pandemic. For a world beset my vaccine inequalities, offering to vaccinate the delegates seems like a bad joke.
Let us have a "physical" COP when it is possible. Climate action need not wait!!
That should read North America and Europe are the only two regions....etc. My bad - apologies. @n_thanki @bforboseman

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with T. Jayaraman

T. Jayaraman Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @tjayaraman

12 Sep
As @JohnKerry lands in India, trust he will explain why the US Treasury Secy. is imposing incredible restrictions on fossil fuel related projects in global South.
home.treasury.gov/system/files/1…
@JMauskar @ambtstirumurti @Amit_Narang @Ninad_India @moefcc @bforboseman @USAndIndia
This guidance asks MDBs to stop ALL, repeat ALL, project assistance to any project involving coal, oil and gas!! Only gas as backup for stand-alone renewable projects will be supported. How does this square with principles of equity and CBDR-RC?
These restrictions are way beyond anything that developed countries are even thinking of doing in short-term. US has no dates for coal, oil or gas phase out. In 2018, US consumed a record 82.1 million cu ft per day of gas.
Read 12 tweets
2 Sep
Outrageous -- Former Australian High Commissioner preaching to India on net zero!! Australia itself has no plans to declare net zero, no declared date of coal phase out, no date of oil and gas phase out. @KanitkarT @JMauskar @Amit_Narang @bforboseman @3rdworldnetwork @TheBTI Image
Climate Action Tracker rates Aussie NDC as "insufficient", compatible only with upto 3 deg C warming. India's NDCs are below 2 deg warming compatible.
Australia is going to use Kyoto Protocol surplus credits for its NDC, meaning that the NDCs are even worth less than they seem on paper. Something others are not doing.
Read 9 tweets
24 Sep 20
@KanitkarT @vnamas @3rdworldnetwork @JMauskar DECODING THE BS ON CARBON NEUTRALITY :
Paris Agreement (PA) calls for global emissions and removals of GHGs to be balanced by mid-century. Does NOT ask for individual countries to do so.
Only equitable basis to this goal -- Developed countries reach zero emissions or at least carbon neutrality even EARLIER than mid-century. Developing countries can have time, individually depending on their national circumstances, until later, even much later than mid-century.
Developed countries declaring carbon neutrality by 2050 means they will continue to maximise their appropriation of the global carbon budget as much as possible. Before the faint-hearted swoon at mention of the B word, this simply means emitting as long and as much as they can
Read 11 tweets
23 Sep 20
@ThomasASpencer @tkanitkar @vnamas @nit_set @JMauskar @3rdworldnetwork Useful thread. Some points: I entirely agree with the assessment of the relative economic strengths of India and China. And that India can't be "de-carbonizing" when it has not even carbonized really. 1/n
Thats a good point to make in these hubris ridden times in India. As I have always maintained, India's entrepreneurial and cultivator classes are so backward in productivity that they cannot even "pollute efficiently". 2/n
I only wish you could also convince Indian environmentalists of this -- who celebrate India's productivity crisis as some kind of proto-sustainability, or who, in some "left" hubris, think India can outdo China in climate action. 3/n
Read 13 tweets
21 Sep 20
@ThomasASpencer @KanitkarT 1/ @ThomasASpencer. Zeroth order remark -- results drawn from a collaboration with a Master's student (TJ's) in her excellent dissertation . Wont name her in this debate without her personal intervention. First, 2017 in the article is an error. Our data is upto 2016.
2/ However, you agree that our conclusion broadly is correct, that patenting has declined (clearly quite sharply) across the CCMTs. Our statement about all developed countries and sub-sectors is based on the use of both OECD STAT and PATSTAT Online.
3/ We have used priority dates and inventor country of residence while extracting the number of patents filed and hence we have country wise data.
Read 20 tweets
19 Sep 20
Unfortunately our doubting @ThomasASpencer is not done with misreading yet, since he is wont give up his evangelical conviction that we sinners are not embracing salvation. @KanitkarT @JMauskar @DrTongia @DrSimEvans @moefcc @Sandeeppaii. First, patenting.
We make clear our patenting remarks refer to technology in climate change mitigation technologies (CCMT), category identified by EPO. Based on PATSTAT online and OECD Stat for analysis. @ThomasASpencer talks about all patenting in all OECD. IRRELEVANT!
Just plotting the movement of prices does not show tech change is under way. Diffusion yes, but real innovation? We have to explain both the fall in prices and the fall in patenting. The first does not negate the other. What about RE subsidies and a regulatory helping hand?
Read 8 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(