THE threat of global warning was dramatically highlighted here yesterday when Friends of the Earth placed ice sculptures in a small public park directly opposite the UN headquarters.
The artistic event with an environmental message was called "Melt!" and even before it was officially opened by the former British environment secretary, Mr John Gummer, the ice statues were melting as New York's temperature soared to 32 C.
Mounted on empty oil drums and bearing such statements as "The world's motor vehicles could form a three lane traffic jam to the moon", each statue contained a frozen plant - lilies, roses, ferns, lupins, even red and green peppers.
These were to represent the loss of ecosystems which may not be able to tolerate climate change. And as the statues melted at alarming speed, with rivulets of water running on to the paths, there was nothing left after three hours but dead plants.
Mr Kevin Dunnion, chairman of Friends of the Earth International, said there were some who believed "that climate change isn't happening, that it's not already upon us". The purpose of "Melt!" was to find a new way of getting its message through.
Clare Patey, the artist who devised "Melt!" in collaboration with Walter Bailey, a Brighton based sculptor, said it was "as important for people in the street to understand climate change as it is for governments to do something about it".
As birds twittered in the trees, Mr Gummer - who takes a strong line on global warming - stressed that the delegates attending the UN special session across the street must reach agreement to take "decisive action" on the issue.
He described the melting statues as an apt symbol of the "major threat" represented by climate change, not just for succeeding generations but also for the present one. He predicted that its effects would be felt within 25 years.
Pointing in the direction of the UN headquarters, Mr Gummer criticised the negotiators representing over 170 countries for "spending their time bickering about bracketed text" - the still contentious items in the political declaration to be issued tomorrow.
He singled out the US "as the world's worst waster of energy", saying that the position it had adopted at the UN's special session was "absolutely intolerable" because, despite "talking nicely", it had put nothing on the table.
Speaking to The Irish Times, Mr Gummer said he believed the US strategy was to "stretch the period forward" for agreeing to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from 2010 to 2050 so that it "would not have to do anything" during President Clinton's term.
Even though the US Congress is controlled by Republicans, who take a jaundiced view of the need for action on global warming, he said it was up to Mr Clinton to "stand up for what he believes, just as the last Conservative government in Britain did".
Ms Sadhbh O'Neill, of Earthwatch, who is one of the Irish delegates to the UN special session, said she found the experience of sitting in on the negotiating sessions "very depressing" as many delegates were determined to "negotiate every line".
She spent most of Tuesday attending the Committee of the Whole, which is drafting the final declaration to mark the end of the special session. "It started out at just four pages, but now it's eight pages long because of all the amendments which have been tabled."
Ms O'Neill, a former Green Party member of Dublin City Council, said "things reached a ludicrous level when the committee even considered setting up a working group to discuss whether the reference to `indigenous people' should be singular or plural".
She blamed the G77 group, which represents 132 developing countries, for raising "trivial issues" such as this as an "obstructionist tactic" until it received guarantees from industrialised countries on financing.
"They're also trying to water down a reference to the `critical role of women' in achieving sustainable development - in effect, going back on commitments they made at the UN conference in Beijing two years ago - and the EU and US are going along with this."
She said the "most bizarre" intervention had been made by China in relation to a reference in Paragraph Four to the need for full participation by civil society. "The Chinese ambassador asked: `What is civil society?' and nearly everyone in the room laughed."
