Tag: Kyoto

CAN Submission: Cancun Building Blocks, October 2010

THE POST-COPENHAGEN ROAD

A fair, ambitious and binding deal is needed more urgently than ever. Climate science is more compelling by the day. Impacts are coming harder and faster. Disastrous flooding in Pakistan, heat waves and forest fires in Russia and hottest recorded temperatures around the globe, amongst other devastating climate-related events, all point to the need for urgent action. Levels of warming once thought to be safe, may well not be, 1.5˚C is the new 2˚C. 

Negotiations Post-Copenhagen
Copenhagen was a watershed moment for public interest and support for climate action – and people have not lost interest. More people in more countries than ever have put their governments on notice that they expect a fair,
ambitious and binding global deal to be agreed urgently. Trust-building is essential after the disappointment of Copenhagen. Developed country leadership must be at the core of trust building efforts. Countries must show
their commitment to the UNFCCC process by driving it forward with political will and flexible positions, rather than endless rounds of repetitive negotiations. Many countries are troublingly pessimistic for Cancun, and are working to lower expectations. While others, including countries most vulnerable to climate change, maintain high expectations.

Challenges ahead of Cancun
There are many challenges to getting a full fair, ambitious and binding deal at Cancun, including:

  • Lack of a shared vision for the ultimate objective of the agreement, and the equitable allocation of the remaining carbon budget and emissions reduction/limitation commitments;
  • Sharp divisions on the legal form of an eventual outcome;
  • Failure of the US Senate to pass comprehensive legislation this year; and
  • Current economic difficulties facing many countries, which make it difficult to mobilize the substantial commitments to long-term climate finance needed as part of any ambitious agreement. 

Positive moves afoot
However, more and more countries, both developing and developed, are stepping up their efforts to pursue low-carbon development and adaptation, despite the absence of an international agreement. This can be seen in a variety of ways:

  • Investments in renewable energies have continued their exponential growth, increasing to 19% of global energy consumed;
  • Progressive countries are working to move the negotiations forward;
  • There is a growing perception that low-carbon and climate-resilient development is the only option to sustainably ensure the right to development and progress in poverty reduction. 

So, what does a pathway forward look like?

Firstly we must learn the lessons of Copenhagen. The “nothing’s agreed until everything’s agreed” dynamic from Copenhagen could mean that nothing would be agreed in Cancun. An agreement in Cancun should instead be a balanced and significant step toward reaching a full fair, ambitious & binding deal at COP 17 in South Africa. This will require parties to work together in good faith to create sufficient gains at Cancun, and a clear roadmap to South Africa. This paper outlines how that could be achieved. 

CAN Intervention in the COP20 CMP Plenary on Agenda Item 8, 3 December, 2014

 

Thank you Mr. President,

I am Juliane Voight speaking on behalf of the Climate Action Network.

The Kyoto Protocol has many elements that we find important precedents for the 2015 Agreement.

  • Its framework allows long term viability, having commitments that can be updated at the same time in every commitment period
  • It has a robust MRV and common accounting system allowing for comparability of effort and clarity of commitment and effort
  • It defines common accounting rules and the basket of gases and common global warming potentials for them, that are counted towards the economy-wide reduction commitment, increasing comparability and ensuring ‘difficult’ emissions are not excluded
  • It has a compliance system
  • It has economy-wide, quantified absolute emissions reduction commitments for developed countries

The KP set the benchmark on these types of commitments for developed countries. And there should be more ambition, and no backsliding, in the 2015 Agreement.

The KP established market mechanisms, which have left lots of challenges in their wake. These mechanisms need to be reformed to go beyond offsetting to provide net mitigation at the global level, IF any use of market-based mechanisms is assumed at all in the post-2020 regime.

We call upon all Parties that have not yet done so, to ratify the amendments for the second commitment of the Kyoto Protocol.

Thank you Mr. President.

CAN Intervention: KP Ministerial Dialogues at SB40s, 6 June, 2014

Thank you President Korolec and Minister Pulgar-Vidal, 

I am speaking on behalf of the Climate Action Network.

Distinguished Ministers, 

This Ministerial meeting is a result of your previous agreement that developed countries' targets for 2020 needed to be more ambitious. This promise was the precondition of the Durban agreement to start the negotiations for the 2015 agreement. Even more importantly, increasing your near-term targets is essential if we are to keep the window to keeping warming below 1.5 degrees C open. This need to revise the 2020 targets applies to all developed country Parties, both inside and outside of the Kyoto Protocol. 

We are disappointed to see that very few ministers have bothered to come here. Is this because Ministers have not been briefed about what is necessary to avoid even more devastating climate impacts than the world is already experiencing? Or is it because Ministers know this all too well, but did not dare to come here to admit that they are going to do nothing in the face of the undeniable scientific evidence of what a failure to act now will mean? 

While some Parties are making more progress in cutting emissions than others, what unsettles us the most is that not a single developed country has indicated their intention to increase their targets for 2020, neither those countries that remain under the Kyoto Protocol or, even worse, from those who have stepped outside (or were never in).  What we have heard today is nothing less than a spectrum of non-commitments. 

Thank you.

 

Topics: 
Organization: 

ADP: Get the Job Done

Image: Saleemul Huq
Whether inside or outside, civil society's message to ministers is clear: 'Do your job and save the climate!'

Last night, negotiators completed comments on the second version of the ADP co-chairs' proposed decision text and draft conclusions. The co-chairs did a skillful job of focusing the discussion on paragraph-by-paragraph textual comments, with only the occasional excursion  into recitation of well-known talking points.

It's clear there are still sharp differences amongst Parties on several issues. The co-chairs' task now is to capture compromises in the new version of their text this morning, and then try to resolve as many remaining differences as possible before sending their proposed decision and conclusions to the COP. That will leave Ministers with a handful of issues to address.

On the 2015 agreement, it's essential that Parties agree here in Warsaw on next steps in the process, including beginning work on a draft negotiating text at the ADP's next session in March in Bonn, and reaching agreement on the information that Parties should provide in their proposed post-2020 commitments no later than the second ADP session in June.

Those proposed commitments should be submitted by Parties in 2014 in order to enable a full and transparent review and allow for upward revisions in ambition by COP 21. The scope and focus of the review process should be agreed in advance of the submission date, so Parties know how their proposals will be judged against each other in terms of equity and fairness, as well as how far the aggregate gets to the 2°C goal.

The ADP should also proceed with the workshop proposed for June on the methodological issues of equity and adequacy, drawing on analysis from the   IPCC and other experts. The workshop on the global adaptation goal should also be held next June.

India loudly proclaimed in yesterday's ADP session that they have long championed equity to be given full consideration in this process, and expressed amaze- ment that after feeling like a voice in the wilderness, interest has suddenly blossomed.

ECO is pretty amazed too – India has been raising so many concerns about the proposed equity workshop that it might be time to reconsider and instead work for a compromise that allows the workshop to proceed.

On pre-2020 ambition, Parties should indeed be ambitious in defining the scope of the ADP's work. Closing the well-documented gigatonne gap by 2020 will require greatly enhanced action on every front:

* All developed countries must enhance the ambition of their emissions reduction targets, and backsliding of the kind recently exhibited by Japan must not be sanctioned by the global community.

* Developing countries that have yet to make near-term emissions limitation pledges should do so, while those that have should implement them and wherever possible, broaden their scope.

* All countries pursue opportunities to ‘catalyze action in areas of high mitigation potential’, as the co-chairs' text puts it; this should include moving forward on the proposal from    AOSIS to move vigorously to exploit readily available energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies.

A notable development was the widespread support for the rapid ratification and entry into force of the second commitment period amendment of the Kyoto Protocol. And all developed countries – KP and non-KP alike – should bring enhanced mitigation commitments to the high-level ministerial dialogue envisioned for next June in Bonn.

Clearly there is much work to do. Parties must agree an acceptable ADP text here in Warsaw, and with that in hand, move forward to enhance pre-2020 ambition and ensure the adoption of a robust and comprehensive post-2020 agreement at COP 21. It’s time for negotiators and ministers to roll up their sleeves and get the job done.

 

Related Newsletter : 

No oasis for climate in Doha desert

 

The UN climate talks failed to deliver increased cuts to carbon pollution, nor did they provide any credible pathway to $100 billion per year in finance by 2020 to help the poorest countries deal with climate change, according to the 700 NGOs who are members of Climate Action Network-International (CAN-I).

Two weeks ago, just prior to the start of these negotiations, numerous credible reports were published by an array of well respected scientists, economists and climate change experts, all with essentially the same conclusion - we are currently on an unsustainable path which virtually guarantees the world will be faced with catastrophic effects from climate change, according to Greenpeace International executive director, Kumi Naidoo.

“Two weeks of negotiations have not altered that path and that politicians need to reflect the consensus around climate change through funds, targets and effective action."

WWF head of delegation, Tasneem Essop, said Doha was supposed to be an important element in setting up for a fair, ambitious and binding deal in 2015 and therefore needed to rebuild trust and instill equity.

“These talks have failed the climate and they have failed developing nations,” Essop said. “The Doha decision has delivered no real cuts in emissions, it has delivered no concrete finance, and it has not delivered on equity.”

Governments have delivered a very vague outcome that might lead to increased ambition but only if the politics shift to working for the people, our future, and not the polluters.

In particular, countries including the US, who have continually blocked progress in the talks, need to fundamentally change their positions in line with their obligation to lead on the solution to this crisis that they created.

Tim Gore, International Climate Change Policy Advisor for Oxfam, said Doha had done nothing to guarantee that public climate finance would go up next year, not down.

“Developing countrieshave come here in good faith and have been forced to accept vague words and no numbers,” Gore said. “It's a betrayal.”

Wael Hmaidan, director of CAN-I, said that ministers needed to go back to their capitals and work hard to put concrete proposals on the table for the next talks so that progress could be made towards to secure a fair, ambitious, and binding deal in 2015.

“The path forward is actually quite clear: we have the technology and know-how to reduce dangerous carbon pollution, protect vulnerable communities, and grow sustainable, resilient, economies.”

“But we also need people in all regions of the world to demand leadership from their governments on climate change – just like the new youth movement in the Arab region has done.”

The Doha Decision:

  • An extraordinarily weak outcome on climate finance which fails to put any money on the table or to ensure a pathway to the $100 billion a year by 2020 target. The decision asks for submissions from governments on long term finance pathways, calls for public funds for adaptation but does not mention a figure, and encourages developed countries to maintain funding at existing levels dependent on their economies.  
  • An eight year second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol with loopholes that allow carry over, use and trading of hot air
  • A call – though not an official ambition ratchet mechanism - for Kyoto Protocol countries to review their emissions reduction target inline with the 25-40% range by 2014 at the latest. While it could have been stronger, the decision reinforces clear moral obligation for countries to increase their emission reduction targets prior to 2020 and provides opportunities for them to do so
  • An agreed work program on loss and damage to help victims of climate change will start immediately anda decision “to establish institutional arrangement, such as an international mechanism, at COP19”
  • Developed countries failed to agree a way to account for their carbon in a comparable way

Contacts
Climate Action Network (CAN) is a global network of over 700 NGOs working to promote government and individual action to limit human-induced climate change to ecologically sustainable levels.
For more information, please contact CAN International Communications Coordinator Ria Voorhaar, email: rvoorhaar@climatenetwork.org, local mobile: +974 33 38 6907.

 

Which Way, Japan?

ECO is concerned to hear that Japan may not keep up its 25% reduction target by 2020 compared to 1990, and instead is considering reducing it to around 5 to 9% (domestic reduction target). 

Of course, Japan has already undermined the momentum of the negotiations by rejecting the Kyoto CP2. If Japan now lowers its voluntary pledge under the Cancun agreement, that reduces ambition and credibility.
 
ECO worries that perhaps Japan’s voice might be not taken seriously anymore. 
 
To some extent, the country has already lost its credibility in the last two years. Now is the time for the Japanese Minister to step up and announce that Japan aims to do everything possible to keep the 25% target intact. It should also pledge appropriate funding for the period 2013 to 2015. This is the only way to regain its positive and constructive role for the global effort to tackle climate change.
Region: 
Related Newsletter : 

Closing the Loose Ends for Adaptation

As COP 18 welcomes Ministers from around the world, ECO would like to focus their attention on significant matters related to adaptation. May we have your attention, Ministers: adaptation needs are closing in fast!

National Adaptation Plans. These are intended to address medium and long term adaptation needs.
 
Let’s keep this short and sweet:
 
First, guidance to the Global Environment Facility is needed now. LDCs are committed, the technical guidelines are out, and there is clear willingness among other developing country Parties. So really, there’s no excuse for delays. 
 
Second, use those funding bodies. The LDCF and SCCF are ready, willing and able to be capitalized.  There’s no denying that more funding is needed and this must be additional to that of NAPAs. Otherwise, all the good and benevolent intentions of NAPs are completely without effect.
 
Loss and Damage.  
Political opportunity cannot be lost here:
 
As negotiators are running out of steam from all their work on the L&D text, ECO will pitch in to make sure that this reaches success.
 
These points should steer you in the right direction:
 
• Loss and damage needs to be given the political space that it deserves; negotiators must keep the political will to keep loss and damage high on the agenda.
 
• The work programme on loss and damage must be approved and continued, with assurance that discussions on an international mechanism will be a focal point.
 
• The text cannot shy away from rehabilitation and compensation – these are key to the loss and damage debate and so outcomes should provide guidance on how to address these aspects further.
 
Ministers need to admit that loss and damage is the unfortunate consequence of the failure to mitigate and the limited international support for adaptation. Now, instead of dwelling on the cause, we must act on the solutions and not let this text fall through the cracks.
 
Some parting words to Ministers on adaptation in the ADP and LCA:
 
ADP: Don’t forget the Cancun Adaptation Framework! ECO wants you to make sure that it’s regularly reviewed in the ADP in light of mitigation ambition and the needs of -- and support to -- developing countries.
 
LCA: Finance is key – this goes without saying. Instead of re-emphasizing the importance of finance for adaptation, ECO expects Ministers to guarantee its delivery without any further delay. There’s ample evidence to prove the existence of sufficient funds so make the commitment!
 
And so the strenuous effort to address loss and damage has a well defined path to success. Let us not fail to achieve it!
 
Related Newsletter : 

Instructions Enclosed for Non-Negotiable Planetary Deadline

Dear Ministers:

This is the non-negotiable planetary deadline. The recent UNEP and World Bank reports have been unequivocal: the window to stabilize temperature increase below 2° C, and thus avoid the most dangerous climate impacts, is closing rapidly. Durban set a number of other deadlines for Doha which must be respected. They include adoption of the amendments to the Kyoto Protocol, the successful closure of the LCA, and agreement on work programmes for both the 2015 Protocol negotiations and raising near-term ambition. So roll up your sleeves, Ministers: there is much to do!  As always, ECO has some helpful hints to make your week easier.

#1 Don’t cheat – it doesn’t help the climate or build confidence 

The amendments to the Kyoto Protocol must be adopted in Doha, progressing the only legally binding climate agreement in order to streamline the process. 

Keeping Kyoto alive is crucial for two reasons – first, it has key architectural elements that must be reflected in the 2015 Protocol. These include overall and national carbon budgets, economy-wide targets, common rules-based accounting, compliance and five year commitment periods. Second, it was part of the Durban package and its adoption will enable progress next year on both elements of the ADP -- its 2015 Protocol negotiations and near-term ambition. Pending its entry into force, it should be provisionally applied from1 January 2013.

But there are some things that should be left behind – the 13 gigatonnes of CO2eq ‘hot air’ from the first commitment period.  It does nothing for the climate and it’s high time to expel it from the system. The next COP President, Poland, must show leadership now and stop stalling efforts in the EU on this issue. 

The good elements of the Kyoto Protocol should not, however, remain the exclusive property of KP parties. We’re looking forward to our ‘ship jumpers’ in the LCA proving that they aren’t evading responsibility.  They can do so by agreeing the same accounting standards and setting carbon budgets here at Doha. 

#2 Face the issues head on

In 2015 the world must conclude a deal that matters for the climate. Parties will need to address two crucial questions: first, what do we need to do to avoid dangerous climate change; and second, how are we going to do that? 

In Doha, to help answer the first question, it is critical to agree on a review of the long-term temperature goal that focuses on exactly that, is narrow in scope, and takes placeunder a robust body. 

Given that equity and ambition are two sides of the same coin, we must also have a one year process exploring equity issues, reporting into the ADP at COP 19 and allowing the ADP to mainstream the progress.

Finally, confronting these issues head on means facing up to the impacts of climate change that are happening now.  Addressing loss and damage is essential to assure the most vulnerable countries that their future prospects are being fully protected. 

#3 Deliver the resources you promised

Vital work to adapt to climate change and transition to a low carbon economy cannot happen without resources.  So delivering on existing finance commitments and planning to meet additional needs must be at the heart of the Doha outcome. Committing to a minimum of $20 billion a year for the 2012-2015 period is the very minimum of the first stepsrequired.  

But in addition, ministers, you must also make sure there is a rigorous system to track the delivery of all money promised, ensuring that it is new and additional, and not quietly recycled from one vitally needed programme to pay for another.  

You must also commit to a political process with the weight to ensure that developed countries scale up climate finance to the promised level of $100 billion per year by 2020. We must not become bogged down in endless technical analysis -- there are already good options on the table. All that is needed to turn them into reality is political will.

Finance is not an add-on to our work on climate; it is what drives our work, and it’s what gives the victims of climate change at least a fighting chance in adapting to the impacts. Finance must be at the center of your attention in the new negotiations under the ADP.

#4 Be Ambitious!

Ministers, we expect you to increase your mitigation and finance ambition right here in Doha. The EU 20% has already been met, the Australian unconditional target of 99.5% is shamefully weak and the U.S. steers away from anything approaching something in the required scientific range.  

Meanwhile, ECO is still waiting to see even one finance figure for the post-2012 period. As a first step toward improving this woeful record, the EU should listen to the German Minister and increase its target to 30% here at COP 18.

The Doha outcome alone will not save the planet, so don't imagine your work is done when you get on the plane going home. The developed world will still need to increase its mitigation and finance ambition massively.  Because your work here will not nearly begin to fill the ambition gap in either area, you will also need to agree this week on both a high level and technical workplan to do so in 2013. 

We cannot afford to waste any more time. All countries need to capitalize on initiatives to raise ambition, whether inside or outside of the UNFCCC -- from reducing HFCs to phasing out fossil fuel subsides.  ECO is also waiting with bated breath for announcements from our Qatari hosts and Gulf neighbours on their contribution to the global effort.

Ministers: You are here to lay the foundations for a new Protocol.  You must therefore instruct your negotiators that they move in the middle of 2013 from conceptual brainstorming to concrete discussions, resulting in a ‘compilation text’  of proposals by COP19. Brainstorm and build -- that’s ECO’s motto!  The re-election of President Obama and the new leadership in China has created the potential for change.  Let’s capitalize on that in Doha and beyond. 

#5 Leave the laggards behind

The planet cannot wait for action. Some countries are clearly not serious about our common endeavor to address the threat of dangerous climate change. 

We cannot afford to wait for Russia, who won’t put a target on the table, but still wants any ‘goodies’ that might be around -- whether it means holding onto its ‘hot air’ or having access to revenues fromcarbon trading.  

We cannot allow the pace to be set by Canada, who failed to meet their commitments under the Kyoto Protocol, and then withdrew in order to avoid the consequences.  

And New Zealand will need to make a choice -- is it serious about climate protection, or does it wish to be singled out as an obstacle to progress? These countries risk becoming increasingly sidelined, as the global community works to forge consensus on a new logic under the ADP.

Ministers, we need you to finish the work begun here in Doha. You must close the loopholes, deliver the money, addressissues head on, and map out a clear course for the negotiations under the ADP. Then you need to go home and act! 

Related Newsletter : 

MORE FOSSILS FOR NEW ZEALAND, USA AND CANADA: ACCOUNTANTS NEEDED TO TALLY TOTALS

 


Photo Credit: CAN Europe

The First Place Fossil goes to New Zealand and the USA for not wanting to advance common accounting rules here in Doha.  CAN was shocked in today’s spin off group on 1b1 when New Zealand had the gall to declare that countries will not agree on common accounting in Doha and thus a pragmatic approach would be to continue talking.  Oh New Zealand, if only that approach would work on climate change!!  But we all know, as Hurricane Sandy dramatically reminded us, climate change waits for no government. So the pragmatic approach would, in fact, be to finally agree that a tonne is a tonne is a tonne and all must be reduced!  The USA has long not moved on this issue and today’s session was no different. But as South Africa helpfully reminded us, it is no longer acceptable to just refer to the system as “rigorous, robust and transparent” but you actually need to agree on the rules to make that happen.  Time to get to work!

Canada wins the Second Place Fossil of the Day award. Oh Canada. When will you give fossil a break? You have failed on Kyoto and you are embarrassing on mitigation, but it seems you will not be content until you hit rock bottom on finance too. You won a first place fossil two days ago for holding finance in the green climate fund hostage, and now we have confirmed you are also breaking with agreed practice when it comes to NAMA support.

By walking away from the agreement to provide information on support available for NAMAs in the Registry, as you indicated yesterday in the SBI, you are not only breaking promises but you are destroying trust. Canada, it is true that we gave up on you a long time ago, but we had hoped if you weren’t going to do anything about your emissions you would at least do your fair share to support those suffering from your soaring pollution.

Lets break it down:

Oh Canada. When will you give fossil a break?
No money, no target, no pledges to make.
Mitigation? No way. Kyoto? Won't play.
GCF or NAMA no new money coming from our way.

Oh Canada, we thought you were done.
Promises broke, trust left with no-one,
Progress, you keep stalling. Your stock keeps on falling,
Positions on finance, mitigation, and more...frankly appalling

Region: 

Floating In Hot Air

While ECO has not yet given up on countries strengthening their national emission reduction targets, there is another simple step that will have a substantial impact. Up to 13 billion tonnes of impact in fact. And ECO knows that the negotiators are well aware of the fact that strong new rules to eliminate the gigantic surplus of emission permits from the Kyoto Protocol's first commitment period will make a real difference. As our dear readers may have noticed, it’s a subject very dear to ECO’s heart. We have been active in naming and shaming Poland, Ukraine and Russia for fighting for the rights to sell their hot air. We have called out the EU for losing its way on the road to progress and on leadership. 

Yet it is not just these countries that are standing in the way of bursting the hot air bubble.  
 
STOP THE PRESSES! It seems that the talks have birthed their latest (non)-negotiating group. Yes, ECO has been hearing rumours that there is a group of Kyoto members, including Australia, Norway and Iceland, forming around a non-position on the carry-over of surplus emissions. It seems they even got a name—if not a position—called the “Fence-Sitters Group.” Perhaps sitting on the fence is a comfortable place to be, when you are surrounded by other countries’ hot air?
 
ECO knows that any surplus AAUs from these countries are not the real reason for concern, yet the Fence-Sitters have the power to do something positive. Get down off that fence and take the lead. Fence-Sitters, you have a series of options that can make a difference – go with the G77 position or check out the Switzerland proposal and take your pick. The world needs to hear from you, and ECO is all ears!
 
Because what it comes down to is a choice between win-win, where these Parties can move the talks forward and get more emission reductions, or lose-lose by putting the talks at risk and missing out on the chance of strengthening the KPCP2.
 
Of course they should not forget that there is another way they can make the KPCP2 more effective - these Parties could always up the ambition of their QELROs...
 
Topics: 
Related Newsletter : 

Pages

Subscribe to Tag: Kyoto