The following are direct excerpts and quotes from organizations, institutions and the scientists themselves regarding the climate science e-mails stolen from servers at the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit.

+ + +

“The Copenhagen Diagnosis,” a consensus science report released Nov. 24, 2009:

“Recent global temperatures demonstrate human-induced warming: Over the past 25 years temperatures have increased at a rate of 0.19 degrees C per decade, in very good agreement with predictions based on greenhouse gas increases. Even over the past 10 years, despite a decrease in solar forcing, the trend continues to be one of warming. Natural, short- term fluctuations are occurring as usual but there have been no significant changes in the underlying warming trend.”

“Acceleration of melting of ice-sheets, glaciers and ice-caps: A wide array of satellite and ice measurements now demonstrate beyond doubt that both the Greenland and Antarctic ice-sheets are losing mass at an increasing rate. Melting of glaciers and ice-caps in other parts of the world has also accelerated since 1990.”

“Rapid Arctic sea-ice decline: Summertime melting of Arctic sea-ice has accelerated far beyond the expectations of climate models. The area of sea-ice melt during 2007-2009 was about 40% greater than the average prediction from IPCC AR4 climate models.”

“Current sea-level rise underestimated: Satellites show global average sea-level rise (3.4 mm/yr over the past 15 years) to be ~80% above past IPCC predictions. This acceleration in sea-level rise is consistent with a doubling in contribution from melting of glaciers, ice caps, and the Greenland and West-Antarctic ice-sheets.”

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Working Group I, “The Physical Science Basis,” issued in 2007:

“Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as is now evident from observations in increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice, and rising global average sea level.”

IPCC response to the stolen e-mails, Dec. 4, 2009:

“IPCC (Working Group I) condemns the illegal act which led to private e-mails being posted on the Internet and firmly stands by the findings of the (Fourth Assessment Report) and by the community of researchers worldwide whose professional standards and careful scientific work over many years have provided the basis for these conclusions.”

IPCC Chair Rajendra Pachauri, at the COP15 opening session, Dec. 7, 2009:

“The recent incident of stealing the e-mails of scientists at the University of East Anglia shows that some would go to the extent of carrying out illegal acts perhaps in an attempt to discredit the IPCC. But the Panel has a record of transparent and objective assessments stretching over 21 years performed by tens of thousands of dedicated scientists from all corners of the globe.”

Phil Jones, Director of the Climatic Research Unit, University of East Anglia (interview with the Guardian newspaper, Nov. 24, 2009):

“That the world is warming is based on a range of sources: not only temperature records but other indicators such as sea level rise, glacier retreat and less Arctic sea ice. … Our global temperature series tallies with those of other, completely independent, groups of scientists working for NASA and the National Climate Data Centre in the United States, among others. Even if you were to ignore our findings, theirs show the same results. The facts speak for themselves; there is no need for anyone to manipulate them.

“Some of the e-mails probably had poorly chosen words and were sent in the heat of the moment, when I was frustrated. I do regret sending some of them. We’ve not deleted any e-mails or data here at CRU. I would never manipulate the data one bit – I would categorically deny that.

“The word ‘trick’ was used here colloquially as in a clever thing to do. It is ludicrous to suggest that it refers to anything untoward.”

Michael Mann, Professor, Pennsylvania State University’s Department of Meteorology (From Copenhagen Diagnosis teleconference with top climate scientists–, Nov. 24, 2009, MP3 Link):

“There is a very robust consensus that humans are warming the planet and changing the Earth’s climate. … There are a handful of people and organizations who have tried to cloud the debate. … They have engaged in this 11th-hour smear campaign, where they have stolen personal e-mails from scientists, mined them for single words or phrases that can be taken out of context to twist their words, and I think this is rather telling. … Those advocating inaction don’t have the science on their side, so they turn to this last- minute smear campaign.”

Richard Somerville, Professor, Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the University of California, San Diego (From Copenhagen Diagnosis teleconference, Nov. 24, 2009, MP3 Link):

“This is reprehensible. It’s criminal activity hacking into e-mails and the quotes that I’ve seen in the press are really just really cherry-picked with words taken out of context, and they don’t really have anything to do with the science. The scientific case that the IPCC made three years that we are bringing up-to-date in the Copenhagen Diagnosis is really not going to be changed by that kind of smear campaign.”

Michael Oppenheimer, Professor, Princeton University (teleconference, Dec. 4, 2009):

“The most important issue is whether anything has been added to or subtracted from the scientific picture of global warming. The answer is simple. Nothing has changed.”

American Meteorological Society, Nov. 25, 2009:

“The beauty of science is that it depends on independent verification and replication as part of the process of confirming research results. … For climate change research, the body of research in the literature is very large and the dependence on any one set of research results to the comprehensive understanding of the climate system is very, very small.”

Significant commitments to reduce developed country greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) will be central to the realization of an effective post-2012 climate treaty in Copenhagen this December.

As the negotiations among the 191 Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) near their climax, emission reduction pledges1 have been put forward by major industrialized countries and economic blocs.2 These include the European Union (EU), Japan, Russia, New Zealand, and Australia. The US House of Representatives has also passed a bill containing emission reduction commitments, although this has yet to become national policy.

This Working Paper presents a comparative analysis of these pledges, which was performed with two key aims:

• To enable negotiators from all countries to compare the emission reduction outcomes that would result from industrialized countries’ pledges; and
• To facilitate efforts to aggregate emission reduction pledges in order to calculate the global impact on the atmosphere.
  From WRI.org.

The Economics of Adaptation to Climate Change study is a multi-year, multi-country study designed to help developing country decision makers more effectively design climate change adaptation strategies through an improved understanding and assessment of the risks posed by climate change, the adaptation measures that can be taken to reduce the risks and/or adverse impacts, and the costs and benefits of such measures.

By identifying the climate change adaption needs of developing countries and their costs, the study also helps inform the international community’s efforts to provide access to adequate support and new and additional resources to help the most vulnerable developing countries meet the costs of adapting to climate change.

The study is a partnership between the World Bank which is leading the technical aspects of the study, the Governments of the United Kingdom, Netherlands, and Switzerland which are funding the study, and the participating developing countries. The study focuses on seven case study countries—Bangladesh, Bolivia, Ethiopia, Ghana, Mozambique, Samoa and Vietnam.
From WorldBank.org.

This book takes another look at the costs of adapting to climate change. The estimates for 2030 used by the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change are likely to be substantial under-estimates. Professor Martin Parry and his co-authors look at the estimates from a range of perspectives, and conclude that:

• the current cost assessments do not include some key sectors, such as ecosystems, energy, manufacturing, retailing, and tourism
• some of the sectors included have been only partially covered in cost estimates
• the additional costs of adaptation have sometimes been calculated as ‘climate mark-ups’ against low levels of assumed investment.

In some parts of the world, low levels of investment have led to an adaptation deficit, and this deficit will need to be made good by full funding of development, without which the funding for adaptation will be insufficient. Residual damages also need to be evaluated and reported because not all damages from climate change can be avoided. There is an urgent need for more detailed assessments of these costs, including case studies of costs of adaptation in specific places and sectors. This report aims to demonstrate the need for the further and transparent refinement of cost estimates for responding to climate change.

Climate change is the defining human development challenge of the 21st Century. Failure to respond to that challenge will stall and then reverse international efforts to reduce poverty. The poorest countries and most vulnerable citizens will suffer the earliest and most damaging setbacks, even though they have contributed least to the problem. Looking to the future, no country—however wealthy or powerful—will be immune to the impact of global warming.

The Human Development Report 2007/2008 shows that climate change is not just a future scenario. Increased exposure to droughts, floods and storms is already destroying opportunity and reinforcing inequality. Meanwhile, there is now overwhelming scientific evidence that the world is moving towards the point at which irreversible ecological catastrophe becomes unavoidable. Business-as-usual climate change points in a clear direction: unprecedented reversal in human development in our lifetime, and acute risks for our children and their grandchildren.
From United Nations Development Program.

World Development Report 2010: Development and Climate Change, released in advance of the December meetings on climate change in Copenhagen, says that advanced countries, which produced most of the greenhouse gas emissions of the past, must act to shape our climate future.  If developed countries act now, a ‘climate-smart’ world is feasible, and the costs for getting there will be high but still manageable.  A key way to do this is by ramping up funding for mitigation in developing countries, where most future growth in emissions will occur.”
–From WorldBank.org’s page on the World Development Report 2010.

“Yet while poor nations see funding as compensation, the United States and other countries are still grappling over how to sell domestically the idea of whopping climate aid packages in a time of financial crisis. At the same time, analysts said, negotiators have purposely held back on offering specific dollar amounts as a negotiating strategy to prod China and others to make emission reduction commitments.

“This is obviously one of the biggest issues in a Copenhagen deal, and there’s some concern about unilaterally committing resources of this magnitude in advance of knowing what developing country actions are going to be,” said Alden Meyer, director of strategy and policy for the Union of Concerned Scientists.”
From a ClimateWire article about the release of the report.

“The separation in practice of the climate change and development agendas has distorted the global debate on the two biggest policy challenges facing the international community. According to the World Economic and Social Survey 2009, an integrated approach based on the concept of sustainable development is urgently needed…To date, the concept of development has too often remained in the background during the evolving climate debate. As a result, the discussions concerning both normative issues (invoking “common but differentiated responsibilities”) and financial ones (entailing how to fund mitigation and adaptation) have become polarized. Moreover, the discussion on creating policies and programmes to support the greening of catch-up growth has hardly started.

The Survey seeks to bridge this gap within the public policy debate. It argues that mitigation and adaptation efforts can move forward effectively only if they are part of a consistent development strategy built around a massive investment-led transformation along low-carbon, high-growth paths.”

–Description from the UN report page.

By 2015 more than 375m people are likely to be affected by climate related disasters – a projected increase of 54% – and this threatens to overwhelm the world’s current capacity to respond.

The world must be better prepared to cope with helping more vulnerable people facing worsening disasters and rich countries must stop the worst of future harm by signing a global deal to tackle climate change.

A fundamental overhaul in the way the world responds to international humanitarian crisis is required to address these growing pressures, worsened by the looming threat of climate change:

• We need $42 billion more now each year in humanitarian aid to help meet people’s basic needs and another $50 billion now each year to help developing countries adapt to the effects of climate change.
• Rich countries, most responsible for the problem, must stop harming by rapidly cutting their carbon emissions and start helping by providing more money and support to help vulnerable countries adapt.
• National governments and the international community must provide more and better, more flexible aid. Aid should be provided on the basis of need – not tied to strategic or political interests, or favor one affected group over another or cherry-pick high profile emergencies.
• To avoid the most extreme potential impact of climate change in the longer term, developing countries must give greater priority to responding to emergencies and reducing people’s vulnerability to them.

Above information from Oxfam International.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon convened a special Summit on Climate Change in advance of the annual UN General Assembly, inviting Heads of State to attend with the goal “to mobilize political will and vision needed to reach an ambitious agreed outcome based on science at the UN climate talks in Copenhagen.”  Over 100 Heads of Government attended the one-day Summit, and marked the first time that U.S. President Obama, Japanese Prime Minister Hatoyam, and Chinese President Jintao visited the United Nations since taking office, and the first time a Chinese President has addressed the UN General Assembly since 1971.    Highlights include:

China
Announced intention to adopt carbon intensity target for 2020.
Pledged to increase the share of renewables energy to 15% by 2020
Pledged to increase forest coverage 40 million hectares by 2020

Japan
Confirmed Japan’s 2020 reduction target of 25% below 1990 levels.
Declared intention to pass domestic emission trading mechanism.
Establish feed-in tariff for renewable energy.

United States
Intention to work with G20 countries to phase out fossil fuel subsidies.

Maldives
Intention to become carbon neutral as a country by 2020.

REDD has evolved rapidly since it was introduced to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in 2005. With 6 months to go until the landmark meeting in Copenhagen where agreement must be reached, over 30 governmental and non-governmental proposals are on the table. The Little REDD Book aims to bring clarity to this complex and rapidly-evolving area by providing insights and information on the process in non-technical language.

The Little REDD Book has recently been updated to reflect the latest research and submissions on REDD and includes a new analytical framework. This second version has also been translated into Bahasa Indonesia, French, Portuguese and Spanish and a further translation is planned into simplified mandarin.

Information above is  from the Global Canopy Programme’s webpage on the Little REDD Book.