Tag: Opening Plenary

I speak on behalf of Climate Action Network, a global civil society network of over 700 NGOs. There are two issues I want to speak about and the first is very short, as CAN has pointed out in the past, the status of fossil fuel subsidies should be reported as part of a country’s national communication in order to provide improved transparency on this issue.

Second CAN appreciates SBSTA's efforts to discuss agriculture. Clearly food production in many countries is threatened. Every human being depends on agriculture for his/her very sustenance; most of the rural poor in developing countries depend on agriculture for their livelihoods. Climate change puts all this at risk.

Agricultural sustainability and enhanced food security, now and in the future, are of critical importance while agricultural activities contribute a significant percentage of greenhouse gas emissions. Addressing these emissions will be critical if we are to achieve the UNFCCC goal of limiting the average global temperature to 1.5 or even 2°C.

Under the Convention, Parties have agreed to prevent dangerous climate change: so as to allow ecosystems to adapt naturally, to ensure that food production is not threatened and to enable economic development to proceed in a sustainable manner.

We recommend that developed countries must progress toward full and comprehensive accounting of the emissions associated with agricultural activities, including bioenergy production and use. For developing country agriculture the priority should be adaptation rather than mitigation. Parties must provide resources for transforming current unsustainable agricultural methods by promoting the development, demonstration, testing and implementation of biodiverse and resilient agriculture together with appropriate technology development and transfer.

Climate-related policies must include safeguards which protect and promote biodiversity, equitable access to resources, food security, the right to food and the rights of indigenous peoples and local populations, while promoting poverty reduction and climate adaptation.

Such policies should take into account recommendations from relevant international institutions.

If we fail in our efforts to progressively enable farmers to deal with climate change impacts we will see the complete destruction of rural livelihoods and food security in developing countries.

Thank you.

Tags:

Topics:

Organization:

Climate Action Network

Related Event:

Bonn Climate Change Conference 2012

CAN Intervention LCA Opening Plenary Durban, November 28, 2011

Submitted by Anonymous on December 2, 2011 - 4:38am

111128_SBSTA_intervention.pdf

Thank you Chair,

I am speaking on behalf of the Climate Action Network.

In Cancun, Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) in the CDM was approved as long as nine critical issues concerning CCS were addressed and resolved in a satisfactory manner. These regulatory issues remain a long way from being resolved. CCS in CDM carries significant environmental and legal implications, particularly for the host countries.We urge parties to carefully re-assess the critical issues and not to rush into dangerous project implementation of an unproven technology.

The CDM Executive Board has just approved a revised methodology for HFC-23 destruction projects under the CDM. The revised methodology still provides exorbitant profit margins of these projects that undermine the phase-out of HCFC-22 under the Montreal Protocol

A promising solution would be to simply pay for the incremental costs of HFC-23 incineration in all HCFC-22 production plants in developing countries, implemented under the Montreal Protocol. Alternatively, HFC-23 destruction in new HCFC-22 plants could be tied into developing country Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs)

On MRV, we look forward to a strong outcome in Durban that includes robust guidelines for biennial reports, IAR, ICA, Annex I accounting, reporting of REDD+ safeguards, and a common reporting format for climate finance. CAN is also deeply committed to guaranteeing access to information and stakeholder participation, in other words, transparency, in the IAR and ICA processes beyond the proposals currently reflected in the draft decision text.

Thank you Mr Chair

Tags:

Organization:

Climate Action Network

UNFCCC

CAN Intervention - Opening KP - 5 April 2011

Submitted by MBrockley on April 5, 2011 - 8:45am

CAN_Opening_KP_Intervention-_5_April.pdf

Opening LWG-KP Plenary – Bangkok
CAN intervention, April 5, 2011

Thank you Mr. Chair,

My name is Sven Harmeling. I’m speak on behalf of the Climate Action Network.

The KP track’s work this year can play an important role in narrowing the gigatonne gap. According to UNEP, this gap could be up to 9 Gigatonnes in 2020 globally, equivalent to the combined annual emissions of China and Russia. CAN urges higher ambition than that assumed by UNEP, so sees an even bigger chasm between the pledges and needed action.

To help close the gap, first, Parties need to address the loopholes we heard about in Sunday’s workshop, used perversely by some to stall their own low-carbon transformation.

o LULUCF rules should increase accountability and such that these sectors deliver        emissions reductions. This means:
•   Not using questionable projected reference levels but using historical reference levels.
•   Not hiding emissions but accounting for all emissions, including other land uses such as cropland and grazing land management, and rewetting and drainage.

o Rules for any new market and non market mechanisms shouldn’t diminish already low        levels of ambition and must not allow double counting, ensuring additional emissions reductions and funding flows.
o Rules are needed to minimise environmental damage from hot air.

Once these loopholes are closed, Parties need to increase their aggregate pledges so that they add up to more than 40% - top end of the 25-40% range that you acknowledged in Cancun. This is needed to put us on a pathway with a reasonable probability of achieving the well-below 2C goal, and keep the 1.5C goal in reach.

Additionally, CAN would like to take this opportunity to remind Parties of some of the        quite-literally vitally important elements of the KP architecture that need to be conserved and developed post-2012, namely its:
o   long-term viability as a framework that can be appropriately updated for each commitment period;
o   aggregate goal for developed countries, allowing appropriate consideration of the science;
o   legally-binding, economy-wide, absolute emissions reduction targets;
o   common accounting, MRV and compliance.

We urge Parties not to throw away the good work of the last 14 years, and to commit to a second commitment period in Durban.

Tags:

Topics: