Tiempo Climate Newswatch

The Chinese government has stressed that efforts are underway to define carbon emissions goals, despite their notable absence in the first national programme to curb greenhouse gas emissions released last week. "We're exploring a new path of development. We won't let per-capita emissions reach a high level and then go down," said Wan Gang, science and technology minister. "The specific techniques and methods for converting [the target of a 20 per cent improvement in energy efficiency by 2010] into carbon dioxide emissions are being studied," he continued.

Analysts reckon that the latest announcement was intended to soften the line that characterized the programme's launch, which had been accompanied by stern warnings that restricting growth could create more serious problems than climate change itself. This came across as "confrontational," commented Shi Yinhong of Renmin University. "It's not a question of the content of the message but how it's delivered, and appearing too hard-line doesn't serve China's interests," Shi said. "A milder approach means China doesn't have to stand out as the target of so much international criticism."

WWF has warned that the European Union's emission trading scheme may be undermined if companies are allowed to buy large quantities of credits from outside the Union instead of making reductions in their own greenhouse gas emissions. Assessing nine national plans, the conservation group estimates that between 88 and 100 per cent of the emissions reductions required under the combined cap for these countries could take place outside the European Union.

There is also concern that 'foreign' credits may be low quality, being sourced, for example, from projects that do not represent additional emission reductions. The trading scheme could become "a messy and deeply flawed market for a virtual commodity that only really benefits the traders," according to WWF. "There is a real danger that this will lock the European Union into high carbon investments and soaring emissions for many years to come," said Keith Allott, head of WWF-UK's climate change programme.

Independent scientists have criticized the claim, published by British Petroleum (BP) in the latest Statistical Review of World Energy, that 'proven' reserves of oil will provide 40 years of consumption at current rates. According to the Oil Depletion Analysis Centre, based in London, peak oil theory predicts that global production of oil is set to peak in the next four years before entering a steepening decline. Colin Campbell, a trustee of the centre, commented that "it's quite a simple theory and one that any beer drinker understands. The glass starts full and ends empty and the faster you drink it the quicker it's gone."

BP's chief economist disagrees. "We don't believe there is an absolute resource constraint. When peak oil comes, it is just as likely to come from consumption peaking, perhaps because of climate change policies, as from production peaking," says Peter Davies. Jeremy Leggett, former Greenpeace campaigner and now head of Solarcentury, comments that the peak oil debate reminds him "of the way no one would listen for years to scientists warning about global warming. We were predicting things pretty much exactly as they have played out. Then, as now, we were wondering what it would take to get people to listen."