ECO 2, Bangkok 2011, Spanish version
Submitted by MBrockley on
Submitted by MBrockley on
Submitted by MBrockley on
Expert workshop on the Technology Mechanism
CAN intervention, April 4, 2011
Thank you Mr/Ms Chair,
My name is Manjeet Dhakal from Nepal and I am speaking on behalf of the Climate Action Network.
The technology cooperation mechanism has been discussed for a long time and we now have a basic framework for an institutional structure under the UNFCCC. However, the entire initiative is put at risk by the failure to establish a mechanism for evaluating whether or not proposed technologies are “environmentally sound" and are worthy of support. Essential to any technology evaluation is the full and authentic participation of civil society.
The achievements of the Cancun Agreements were the formation of a Technology Mechanism, including the Technology Executive Committee (TEC) and the Climate Technology Centre and Network (CTCN). We urge the delegates to frame the TEC so that it can decide on every activity that will be carried out under the climate technology cooperation framework, and agree that the CTCN will operate under its supervision. Both bodies must ensure balanced representation. There is no doubt that the vulnerable courtiers, particularly LDCs would benefit from CTCs, so we humbly request parties to prioritize these countries while allocating the locations of centers.
One of the frustrating elements of the Cancun Agreement was that the issue of IPR was thrown into the recycle bin. We urge the parties to put the IPR issue back on the table for constructive discussion.
Parties need to work hard on technology this year to reach a positive conclusion. Along with the work programme discussion scheduled to happen here in Bangkok, the IPR issue also needs space on the agenda.
We urge accountable and transparent reporting of the TEC to the COP and effective means of oversight of the CTCN. This will bring some amount of transparency in the whole process.
Submitted by Anonymous on
Submitted by Anonymous on
Submitted by MBrockley on
Submitted by MBrockley on
8 December 2010
Cancun, Mexico – Japan earned a 1st place Fossil for its continued efforts to kill the
Kyoto Protocol by preventing a second commitment period from moving forward.
The United States, fresh off its first, and 1st place, Fossil in Cancun yesterday, earned
its first 2nd and 3rd place Fossils for slowing technology transfer and developing
country adaptation support.
The Fossils as presented read:
"The United States wins the 3rd place Fossil. Congratulations US - Technology
transfer has been a core commitment since the beginning of the Convention, and
we’ve already wasted too much time discussing how to do it. A workable proposal is
finally on the table and everyone else is willing to go with it and establish the new
technology mechanism here in Cancun. But yesterday, you made it clear that in your
view, the Parties should only ‘consider’ establishing it.
That’s strange, given that the Copenhagen Accord clearly states that leaders agreed to
‘establish a Technology Mechanism’, ‘operational immediately’. We are surprised
you are going back behind what heads of state already agreed to and try to renegotiate
a deal struck a deal struck among world leaders. For the last year, most parties in the
technology negotiations have been working hard to answer the remaining questions
and a lot of progress was made in Cancun. While everyone else is being flexible, your
obstructionism is blocking any progress.
The US championed the need for a technology center and network and you are
developing some regional center pilots, so why the heartburn on the proposal on the
table? Concerns by US clean tech companies about being under a burdensome and
bureaucratic UN body are misinformed; what our warming world needs is precisely
what a multilateral mechanism can deliver: coordinated planning and implementation
to speed-up and scale-up the what poor countries and communities need to transition
quickly to a low-emissions future."
"The USA wins the 2nd place Fossil for delaying agreement on the establishment of
an Adaptation Committee, which is demanded by developing countries to improve
coherence and coordination of adaptation under the Convention. The US continues to
insist on clarification of the functions and asked in Cancun whether this could not be
dealt with under SBSTA, an approach which they had rejected some years ago when
it was on the SBSTA agenda. The Convention process requires a dedicated
institutional arrangement on adaptation which can initiate further action, not limited to
technical advice. This function cannot be fulfilled by existing institutions outside the
Convention."
"The 1st place Fossil goes to Japan. Although the Minister arrived on Sunday, Japan
has not yet changed its position of rejecting to put its target for the second
commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol, which virtually kills the future of the
Kyoto Protocol. Despite the plea from all around the world, even in the midst of the
isolation (with hidden allies consisting of Russia and Canada), Japan's inflexibility
endangers the whole discussion of the future framework at CANCUN, which the earth
desperately needs."
_______________________________________
About CAN: The Climate Action Network is a worldwide network of roughly 500
Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) working to promote government and
individual action to limit human-induced climate change to ecologically sustainable
levels. www.climatenetwork.org
About the fossils: The Fossil of the Day awards were first presented at the climate
talks in 1999 in Bonn, initiated by the German NGO Forum. During United Nations
climate change negotiations (www.unfccc.int), members of the Climate Action
Network (CAN), vote for countries judged to have done their 'best' to block progress
in the negotiations in the last days of talks.
Submitted by Anonymous on
Evaluating the endgame roles played by key countries
[Cancún, Mexico] An on-demand U.N. webcast is now available streaming a media briefing hosted Friday, December 7, by CAN International to assess progress in the UNFCCC climate negotiations underway in Cancún, Mexico.
NGO experts on the panel include Alden Meyer of the Union of Concerned Scientists; Raman Mehta of CAN South Asia; and Masako Konishi, WWF Japan.
What: On-demand briefing by webcast on the Cancún climate talks
Webcast Address: http://webcast.cc2010.mx/webmedia_en.html?id=297
(www.unfccc.int)
Original webcast date: 2:30 PM local (20:30 GMT), Friday, December 10, 2010
Who: NGO experts on UNFCCC negotiations
Climate Action Network (CAN) is a global network of over 550 non-governmental organizations working to promote government and individual action to limit human-induced climate change to ecologically sustainable levels. For more information go to: www.climatenetwork.org <http://www.climatenetwork.org/> .
For more information contact:
Hunter Cutting: +52(1) 998-108-1313 (local)
###
Submitted by Anonymous on
Author: Colette Benoudji, LEAD Tchad
The Chad government’s decision last year to ban the use of firewood for cooking was a brave attempt to reduce deforestation, but it has caused significant hardship among those who depended on it. A campaign to distribute solar cooking stoves has given thousands of women across the country a much-needed alternative, demonstrating how technological innovation can provide a neat solution to environmental and development problems.
Like other countries in the African Sahel, the semi-arid region bordering the Sahara, Chad is threatened with creeping desertification. Years of low rainfall have allowed the sands to advance on areas that used to hold vegetation. Evaporation and the diversion of water for agriculture have caused Lake Chad to shrink from 25,000 square kilometers in the early 1960s to just 3,000 square kilometers today, with the Sahara sands moving southwards across its northern shores. As a result of the effects of drought and desertification on agriculture, the UN and other experts have predicted a food shortage that could affect several million people later this year.
The government says desertification has been hastened by the indiscriminate cutting down of trees for charcoal, used widely for cooking. Last year, the country’s president, Idriss Déby, issued a decree banning the use of firewood and charcoal for cooking in an attempt to stem the loss of tree cover. This has been strictly enforced, and families have been forced to burn everything from furniture to plant roots to cook. The government has been encouraging the use of gas, but few Chadians have gas equipment.
Lead Tchad received training from the non-profit KoZon Foundation in The Netherlands to work on a technology-based solution to this problem, one that could help save trees as well as giving families an alternative means of cooking: solar stoves. These consist of a foil-covered cardboard reflector which directs sunlight onto a dark pot. The pot is kept in a plastic bag to retain the heat. They cost less than US$10 eachand are easy to use .
Lead Tchad team started to train groups of women in Chad in how to use the stoves. This led to a meeting with the ministry of women’s affairs, at which we convinced them that solar stoves could help ease the hardship that the government’s ban on charcoal was causing women across the country, especially those in poor rural areas . During National Women’s Week last year , we launched a national campaign to distribute solar stoves to women attending the event.
Since then, the KoZon Foundation, the Government of Chadthroughout the Ministry of Women Affairs and other groupshave distributed more than 2,000 solar stoves to women in Chad, largely to women coming from the rural areas. The technology is playing a crucial role in helping the government cut deforestation rates, while offering people an alternative, affordable source of energy for cooking. The stoves are being used everywhere, though there have been problems. Some women are nervous of trying the new technology and the cooking styles it demands. Furthermore, the stoves work less effectively during the rainy season.
Thanks to this initiative, Lead Chad received funds from AED/USAIDfor supporting women in 3 rural villages in Chad with solar stoves project. Women in rural Chad are 90% illiterates so that Lead Tchad try to link this project with adult women alphabetization.
LESSONS LEARNED
Submitted by Anonymous on
Ministers, it’s ECO again. May we have a few moments with you? Yes, you guessed it – right here in your hands is our clean and manageable list of key decisions for the remainder of the week.
We’ve heard that you feel there are too many choices and papering over the differences in the negotiations might be the best achievable for the moment. But
remember, that trick only works once.
A high level political statement by itself will not cut it. We need a real agreement in Cancun, not a repeat of Copenhagen’s climate shame. No magic moment is going to arrive when the hard choices become easy. But the path to achievement is just steps away.
ECO is wondering what is going on in the Shared Vision negotiations. We heard whispers of much needed improvements, such as the recognition of the need to reduce atmospheric concentrations of CO2 to no more than 350 ppm and limit global temperature rise to 1.5° C, as well as the acknowledgement of historical responsibility and the link between human rights and climate change related actions.
All these elements must be included for a clear and robust shared vision that reflects our collective intention to ensure a liveable planet for us and for future generations.
But Ministers, ECO is going blue in the face! How many more times do we have to say ‘Gigatonne Gap’ before it
finally sinks in? As UNEP affirmed in its authoritative report, there is a significant gap between the emissions pledges set forth in Copenhagen and the reductions the planet actually needs by 2020 to limit warming to 2° C, much less the 1.5° needed to avoid severe and even catastrophic impacts.
Yet the latest version of the Mitigation text contains no acknowledgement of the Gigatonne Gap, nor does it set forth a timely process to close it. A legitimate outcome in Cancun must explicitly provide the pathway to increased ambition.
ECO also calls on parties to anchor the pledges currently on the table so that commitments and actions can be strengthened over the next year before inscribing them in legally binding form in South Africa.
ECO is pleased that the MRV text has evolved in the past week from an empty 36-word shell to a real basis for negotiation.
But there’s a long way to go. The tables have turned here in Cancun and we’re finally hearing more about the need for enhanced MRV provisions for Annex I countries, including common accounting rules, as well as MRV of finance using a common reporting format.
This is only right – the United States and other developed countries have been calling for increased transparency for developing countries but have been shy about improving their own.
Establishing a Technology Mechanism and creating an operational Technology Executive Committee (TEC) is well within the remit here.
Unfortunately, the USA has been blocking progress on the TEC and CTCN discussions and negotiators are planning to kick many elements into the long grass, such as reporting lines and the link to the financial mechanism. This would be dangerous as it would leave too many issues to be dealt with during 2011.
The draft text is virtually content free when it comes to creating an operational framework for new, radically scaled-up, focused and integrated Capacity
Building.
The stocktaking needs to clarify whether developed countries intend to take
capacity building seriously (that is, on par with finance and technology), or whether they are happy enough just to leave it behind as crumbs in the corner.
On International Transport, the COP must guide ICAO and IMO in taking effective action to reduce emissions quickly, create a framework for these sectors to fairly contribute funds to mitigation and adaptation in developing countries, and ensure no net incidence of impacts on developing countries.
On Adaptation, a Cancun decision must launch the committee to oversee technical and coordinating provisions for adaptation under the Convention. Further, response measures does not have a place under the adaptation agenda. The resources available for adaptation should not be use as compensation for the loss on oil revenue as a result of mitigation action.
By the end the week decisions on
Financing must be taken to establish a climate fund under the guidance and
authority of the COP, along with a process to clarify the scale of this fund and guarantee sufficient resources for adaptation, along with the mechanisms and instruments to generate the required revenue flows.
We have heard that some developed countries are raising doubts about their ability to contribute to a fund under the UNFCCC due to constitutional or other legal impediments. These are simply tactical maneuvers to delay a decision,
using the fund as a bargaining chip to get concessions from developing countries on other issues such as international consultations and analysis.
Negotiations on the Flexible Mechanisms are (unsurprisingly) facing difficulty, including even which text should be used.
However, at least two things should be done. First, the loopholes in existing mechanisms must be closed now. A primary example is surplus AAUs. Second, relevant principles should be set for further negotiations in LCA. If any new mechanisms are to be discussed going forward, they must go beyond offsetting. And they have to close the Gigaton gap, not widen it. Other important principles should also be set such as preventing double counting, supplementarity and contribution to sustainable development.
A very disturbing development is that the option for keeping CCS out of the Clean Development Mechanism has vanished from the draft text being forwarded to the CMP. At the very least, SBSTA must address the creation of perverse incentives for increased dependence on fossil fuels.
On land and forests, the message is simple but let’s say it again: Close the loopholes!
With respect to legal form, ECO calls on Parties to establish open and transparent processes to discuss their proposals, both now and after Cancun. Likewise, just as the Berlin Mandate provided clarity on legal form to the negotiating process that resulted in the Kyoto Protocol, Parties should agree mandates at Cancun to confirm the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol as well as a legally binding outcome in the LCA and set them up for adoption at COP 17 in South Africa.
Submitted by Anonymous on
December 9, 2010
[Cancún, Mexico] The leaders of four international environment and
development organizations have traveled to Cancún to call upon Ministers to
produce a strong and meaningful climate agreement in talks underway here
hosted by the UNFCCC.
Climate Action Network will host a media panel for the leaders to share
their call, Thursday, December 9, at 11:30 AM local (17:30 GMT), in Room
Luna of the Azteca building of the Moon Palace in Cancún, host to the UNFCCC
negotiations.
Leaders participating on the panel will include:
€ Yolanda Kakabadse, President, WWF International;
€ Jeremy Hobbs, Executive Director, Oxfam International;
€ Kumi Naidoo, Executive Director, Greenpeace International; and
€ David Turnbull, Executive Director, CAN International.
What: World NGO leaders share their call upon Ministers in the Cancún
climate talks
Where: UNFCCC Press Conference Room Luna, Moon Palace, Cancún
Webcast Live: http://webcast.cc2010.mx/ (www.unfccc.int)
When: 11:30 AM local (17:30 GMT), Thursday, December 9, 2010
Who: NGO experts on UNFCCC negotiations
Climate Action Network (CAN) is a global network of over 550
non-governmental organizations working to promote government and individual
action to limit human-induced climate change to ecologically sustainable
levels. For more information go to: www.climatenetwork.org
<http://www.climatenetwork.org/> .
For more information contact:
Hunter Cutting: +52(1) 998-108-1313
###