And you don't have to even crane your neck

This week, I am in Paris to do an International Energy Agency workshop and staying with a friend for the weekend. And this is his view from the front window...sigh.

Regional forecasts - still early days

Quirin Schiermeier has an excellent article in Nature which looks at four areas of significant dispute within climate science circles: regional climate forecasts, precipitation forecasts, aerosols and palaeoclimate data.

Regional forecasts are a critical tool for local governments and it seems to me that we are awaiting good approaches to closely-grained data to justify the costs of action on adaptation in some cases:

"Downscaled climate models face particular uncertainty problems dealing in regions with complex topography, such as where mountains form a wall between two climatically different plains. Another potential source of error comes from projections concerning future greenhouse-gas emissions, which vary depending on assumptions about economic developments."

With the levels of uncertainty high, we need to mount potent multi-factorial arguments to ensure that we capture all of the benefits - as I suspect that the costs will have a large in-built variability for some time.

Curious scenes: will we all look back and shake our heads in wonder ?

From Water Words that Work: the September 2009 floods in Georgia, USA. Wild and extreme weather is not just a forecast...

You say cities, I say local governments

Cities are all the rage internationally. But there is clearly two conversations going on: one that talks about local governments and one that talks about urban cities.

The local government conversation focuses on, well, government that is local - such as Councils, shires, municipalities and so on. They may be urban and very large (Brisbane City Council has over 1 million people in Australia) or rural and very small (Diamantina Shire has around 2000 people at the top end of the same State).

The focus here is on the local feedback loops that can be democracy at its best or worst: speedy, innovative, parochial, old-fashioned and so on. From this focus comes "localism" and an interest in working in a small-scale area of action. It has been the fuel for the growth of organisations such as ICLEI over the past 15 years.

The urban conversation is the one that you hear including comments such as: "75% of energy use is in cities" or "over half of the global population now lives in cities" - I swear I heard these quotes a dozen times a day in Copenhagen. Mr Van den Brande, President of the Committee of the Regions, gave us both in one go.

Putting aside the significant methodological issues concerning counting urbanisation (see the 2008 World Energy Outlook for a look at this), and therefore not getting too focused on the numbers, this story is all about clout and action. The World Bank even supports action with cities!

But they are two different concepts, even though they may overlap. In UN speak, the term "cities" is shorthand for local governments, but local governments know that this is not true.

Many rural local governments are crucial in the climate change debate for example), though not necessarily as the end-users of energy. As potential sites for significant energy supply - such  as wind farms - it could be argued that in many countries rural local governments (and the ways that they manage planning regulations and land-use) are more important than many urban areas.

As well, many rural local governments will be at the cutting edge of work on adapting to the impacts of climate change, an adaptation that will need to be skillfully integrated into the other pressing priorities of local life.

So, yes, cities are important for all of the reasons that are commonly shared. But let's not suggest that they are sufficient to do the entire job...