ECO 9, COP 16, French Version
Submitted by MBrockley on
Region:
Organization:
Related Event:
Related Member Organization:
Tag: Technology
ECO 8, COP 16, French Version
Submitted by MBrockley on
Region:
Organization:
Related Event:
Related Member Organization:
World Bank to Coal: ‘I Just Can’t Quit You!’
Submitted by Anonymous on
As the World Bank Group positions itself to play a central role in delivering climate finance, the incoherence in its lending practices scream out for attention.
Despite increasing its renewable energy lending, the institution spent more on coal in 2010 than renewable energy and energy efficiency combined. The Bank’s continued commitment to coal – the most energy intensive and destructive fuel source on the planet – is a black mark on its record that no amount of rosy public relations spin can scrub off.
If the World Bank believes it can credibly deliver climate finance, it must make a strong and credible commitment to clean up its act. And now it has the perfect opportunity to demonstrate that by revising its Energy Strategy to phase out fossil fuels, ensure energy access for the poor, and guarantee that all large scale hydropower lending meets stringent requirements.
A strong strategy guiding its energy investments for years to come will send an important signal that the Bank is serious about delivering on its commitment to climate finance.
Without a strong energy strategy however, it is clear that the Bank should not serve even a trustee role in future climate finance. Beneath its glossy brochures and hearty speeches, a large portion of its energy sector lending is going to destructive coal projects. The world is changing rapidly and the Bank is not keeping up. If it genuinely wants to help build the 21st century clean energy economy, it must heal the wounds it has inflicted in the past.
And the World Bank can make the strongest statement of all by quitting coal for good.
Tags:
Topics:
Related Event:
ECO 7, COP 16, French Version
Submitted by MBrockley on
Region:
Organization:
Related Event:
ECO 6, COP 16, French Version
Submitted by MBrockley on
Region:
Organization:
Related Event:
ECO 5, COP 16, French Version
Submitted by MBrockley on
Region:
Organization:
Related Event:
CAN intervention - COP Agenda Item 5: Article 17 - COP 16 - 1 December 2010
Submitted by Anonymous on
Madam President, Distinguished Delegates,
My name is Yang Ailun from China. I am speaking on behalf of Climate Action Network, a global network of over 500 NGOs.
Today you have an opportunity to establish a process to resolve one of the many vexing problems that is contributing to the inability of these negotiations to make substantial progress towards a Fair, Ambitious and Legally Binding outcome.
CAN has consistently supported an amendment to the Kyoto Protocol that will establish a second commitment period – thus preserving the legal and institutional structure we have all worked so hard to build.
At the same time, the COP has a chance to establish a contact group to consider the proposals that have been on the table for over a year now, that reflect different approaches to the legal form of the outcome of the LCA negotiations.
We urge you to establish a contact group now to consider these proposals in an open and transparent manner with a view to providing greater focus to the negotiations going into Durban next year.
Without clarity as to where the negotiations are heading, it will be hard to get there.
Tags:
Organization:
Related Event:
ECO 4, COP 16, French Version
Submitted by MBrockley on
Organization:
Related Event:
ECO 3, COP 16, French Version
Submitted by MBrockley on
Region:
Organization:
Related Event:
The Climate Right-to-Know
Submitted by Anonymous on
As the SBSTA opens today, ECO would like to remind delegates of a crucial item on the agenda: the proposal for a technical review of the science relating to long-term temperature increases of more than 1.5° C above pre-industrial levels.
What’s this all about? It’s about clarifying what is really at stake here. It’s about urgently bringing in the latest science to inform the ongoing negotiations, and spelling out the choice that governments now face – a choice between raising ambition to a level high enough to avoid climate chaos, or accepting the devastating consequences of a failure to act in time and at scale.
This issue was first put on the agenda in Bonn in June. There, AOSIS – alarmed by recent reports suggesting that the future of their nations could be at risk even if global temperature rise is stabilized at 2° C – proposed that the Secretariat produce a summary of recent scientific studies.
During the negotiations in Bonn it was clarified that this task lies well within the mandate and capabilities of the Secretariat, and that this by no means would be duplicating the work of the IPCC. With these common understandings in place, the vast majority of governments supported the proposal from the small island states.
In the end, however, a few governments still resisted the idea of an overview of recent science. One even went so far as to suggest that vulnerable countries who wanted to know more about the impacts they are facing from climate change could just use Google.
Cancun must not be the COP where governments decide to stick their heads in the sand and ignore the latest science relating to the consequences of the path they are now taking.
Furthermore, governments must remember that while some countries are confronting imminent threats to their very existence, every last one faces severe climate risk. AOSIS and the rest of the world’s most vulnerable countries are standing at the front of the line, but the rest of the world is right behind.
Clarifying the scientific realities about climate change must not be an issue just for AOSIS to push. Dear governments – speak no evil – don’t block a technical review to clarify the impacts facing us all if we exceed a long-term temperature rise of 1.5° C. Sooner or later all countries are highly vulnerable, and we all have a right to know.
Topics:
Related Event:
Pages
