Tag: bunkers

Closing the Gap On Aviation and Shipping

Submitted by rvoorhaar on May 2, 2013 - 12:38am

This is the year for a fresh start in addressing emissions from aviation and maritime transport – those uniquely international sectors that have generated so much discussion and so little action over the years.

This year, the Assemblies, the highest bodies of both the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) are meeting for the last time before 2015. This will be their chance to make progress on these fast-growing sectors in the pre-2020 period, including by putting a price on emissions from ships and aircraft.

These sectors can make an important contribution to closing the gigatonne gap, both in the period up to 2020 and beyond. These sectors, which account for around 5% of global CO2 emissions, can contribute reductions of up to 0.5 GtCO2e. But perhaps more importantly, decisive progress in addressing these emissions can restore confidence in our multilateral institutions and demonstrate the collective global political will needed to make the transformative steps necessary to prevent a climate disaster.

What’s more, we cannot pass up the chance to use carbon pricing from these sectors as an innovative source of reliable and stable public climate finance for actions in developing countries, and in the sectors themselves, to supplement contributions from the budgets of developed countries.

A decision on a global approach to carbon pricing on aviation this year is critical. The ICAO Council has created a High Level Group on Climate Change to unlock progress and give political impetus to this discussion, in advance of the September ICAO Assembly. The Council meeting coming up later this month will be the best opportunity to assess progress in the High Level Group and find agreement on a comprehensive global approach that includes carbon pricing for international aviation emissions.

On maritime transport, the IMO’s Marine Environment Protection Committee will also meet later this month and is likely to resume discussions of options to put a price on emissions. Decisions need to be taken that create a clear roadmap to reach an agreement on carbon pricing.

Finally, to ensure these sectors make their fair contribution to global mitigation and financing efforts, the ADP needs to put emissions from international transport firmly on its agenda in both Workstreams, and send the signal to the IMO and ICAO that action is expected in 2013.

In all of these fora, the key to progress is finding creative ways of addressing equity and the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities, in workable ways appropriate to these inherently international sectors. Concerns from both developed and developing countries about setting precedents for other sectors can and should be addressed. After all, the uniquely international nature of maritime transport and aviation requires approaches tailor-made to these sectors, which cannot be seen as precedents for other sectors where emissions occur entirely on national territory.

Tags:

bunkers

ADP2

Topics:

Bunkers

Related Event:

ADP Second Session 2013

rvoorhaar's blog

Climate Action Network Position on Market Based Measures (MBMs) for International Aviation-February 2013

Submitted by Sam Harris on February 28, 2013 - 11:53am

can_position_on_aviation_-_final_feb2013.pdf

International aviation is a major and fast-growing source of greenhouse gas emissions. Despite on-going discussions for over 15 years within the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) there exists no legal instrument which addresses the limitation and reduction of emissions of the international aviation sector globally, even though emissions have grown to the point where aviation represents an estimated 4.9% of global radiative forcing. Further, aviation activities are being under-charged from an environmental perspective. Yet there is high potential to reduce these emissions globally, beyond the energy efficiency measures being developed and considered under ICAO. Carbon pricing would be an effective means of addressing this situation and can be applied fairly and equitably.

The current year – 2013 – is a crucial year for decisions on the adoption of market-based mechanisms to address aviation emissions. The European Commission proposed in late 2012 a one year “stop the clock” exemption, temporarily deferring enforcement of the obligation of aircraft operators in respect of incoming and outgoing flights under the EU’s Emission Trading Scheme (ETS) to give a final chance for the adoption of a global approach through a multilateral process under ICAO. In late 2012 the ICAO Council created a High Level Group on Climate Change to provide political impetus towards agreement on measures to address GHG emissions, including a global market-based measure (MBM). The highest decision making body of ICAO – its triennial Assembly – is meeting in September/ October 2013. Since it only meets every three years it is essential that an ambitious global MBM for addressing the sector’s emissions is agreed upon at this year’s Assembly.

<more>

Tags:

aviation

bunkers

MBMs

Emissions from international aviation and shipping

Market Based Measures

Topics:

Bunkers

Organization:

Climate Action Network

CAN Positions

Submission by the Climate Action Network (CAN) on cooperative sectoral approaches and sector-specific actions: emissions from international aviation and maritime transport

Submitted by Secretariat on October 4, 2012 - 1:37pm

CAN_submission_on_sectoral_approaches_Sept2012.pdf

Background:

International aviation and maritime transport are major and fast‐growing sources of greenhouse gas emissions, while being under‐taxed from an environmental perspective. Yet there is high potential to reduce those emissions globally, beyond the energy efficiency measures developed and considered under the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and the International Maritime Organization (IMO). Carbon pricing would be an effective means of addressing this situation and can be applied fairly and equitably. In addition, it could raise considerable funds to support climate action in developing countries, and in the maritime and aviation sectors.

<more>

Tags:

bunkers

sectoral approaches

Emissions from international aviation and shipping

Topics:

Bunkers

Finance

Mitigation

Organization:

Climate Action Network

CAN Positions

Banking on Bunkers

Submitted by Secretariat on September 2, 2012 - 8:30pm

Today, Parties will meet under the LCA Sectoral Approaches spin-off group for the last time before Doha to discuss how to address the fast-growing emissions from international transport. Parties must make sure Doha provides a signal to the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and the International Maritime Organization (IMO) on how to reconcile the UNFCCC principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities (CBDRRC) of Parties, with the practices and principles of these sectoral bodies, which have a long history of regulating ships and aircraft on the basis of equal treatment of all.

Negotiating positions of many parties have remained frozen in time for the past decade or so – sadly unlike the Arctic. For those who haven’t been hunkered down in bunkers, ECO will explain. At one end of the range there’s the US and Japan, who want the IMO and ICAO to proceed with no input from the UNFCCC. At the other end, a group of developing countries who want the UNFCCC principles to override those of the sectoral bodies, which are independent and autonomous bodies under the UNFCCC, thereby treating these inherently global sectors in the same way as nationally based emission sources. This could mean for example that ships owned or operated by companies based anywhere in the world could easily escape regulation simply by reflagging to another country to avoid compliance.

Singapore has presented a helpful compromise, saying that emissions from international aviation and shipping should be addressed through global measures under ICAO and IMO, while taking into account the principles and provisions of the UNFCCC. This is sensible and appropriate as far as it goes, but even more helpful would be to give an indication of how CBDRRC might be taken into account. It seems risky to leave the interpretation of UNFCCC principles entirely up to other bodies – after all, even seasoned climate negotiators find it tricky! The most promising way to address CBDRRC could be through provisions involving revenues and/or handling of allowances from a global multilateral approach. Differentiation in terms of revenues could allow, for example, support to improve energy efficiency and technology transfer and cooperation within the shipping sector. This can ensure any burden on developing countries is addressed appropriately, with the use of remaining revenues from developed countries for climate finance through the Green Climate Fund.

So there you have it, Parties. This would give you something to think about. But don’t take too long; remember this is your last day before COP18 and the ice is melting…

Tags:

Topics:

Region:

Related Event:

Bangkok Climate Change Conference 2012

Secretariat's blog

CAN Intervention - LCA Sectoral Approaches Spin-Off Group - May 23, 2012

Submitted by MBrockley on May 23, 2012 - 6:47pm

Sect_App_-_23_May.pdf

Thank you Mr. Chairman for the chance t
o speak on sectoral approaches and more specifically

on addressing emissions from bunker fuels. I am speaking behalf of the Climate Action

Network.

We would like to address the questions you have posed to this group.

On the first question: We find ourselves in the interesting position of agreeing with Canada,

and also with Burkina Faso, Singapore and Chile on the special status of international

transport. There has to be separate treatment of those inherently international sectors where

emissions occur outside and between national boundaries. So it is likely not a useful exercise

to spend more time and efforts to develop a framework covering all sectors, unless it is

involves recognizing and starting from this distinction.

ON the second question, we welcome the willingness expressed by most parties to send a

signal to IMO, but we note some differences in what that signal should be. We think

international maritime transport and aviation should be seen as uniquely global sectors with

shared and overlapping jurisdiction between UNFCCC and the specialized agencies IMO and

ICAO. In this context, it is not useful to propose that the principals of one body taking

precedence over another, but of finding arrangements that reflect the principals and

customary practices of both bodies. Saying that the principals of one body should take

precedence over another is a clear recipe for continued stalemate.

On the third question – we think it is extremely important to get a robust outcome from Doha.

For bunker fuels we need a signal that recognizes and encourages the ongoing work of the

IMO and ICAO, and gives them advice on a way forward that reconciles the principles and

procedures of the different bodies, and notes that these sectors should contribute their fair

share to global efforts and increased ambition. We understand that the best way to do this in

the context of the current discussions in both bodies of global market based measures, is to

pursue global measures consistent with the procedures of the IMO and ICAO, while addressing

differentiation and the UNFCCC principles through the use of revenue generated. This revenue

can be used to directly address impacts on developing countries from the measures

themselves, and additional financing can be channeled to developing countries for climate

actions through the Green Climate Fund, as well as for in-sector actions.

Thank you Chair

Tags:

Topics:

Region:

Organization:

Climate Action Network

UNFCCC

Related Event:

Bonn Climate Change Conference 2012

CAN Intervention - Sectoral Approaches - December 2nd 2011

Submitted by Anonymous on January 18, 2012 - 6:30pm

CAN_intervention_on_Cooperative_Sectoral_Approaches.pdf

Tags:

Long-term Cooperation actions

Topics:

Organization:

Climate Action Network

Kyoto

UNFCCC

Related Event:

COP17/CMP 7 – Durban

Sandra Guzman calls on countries to step up ambition

Submitted by MBrockley on October 7, 2011 - 6:37pm

Sandra Guzman calls on countries to step it up

Sandra Guzman
Program Director Air and Energy
Mexican Center of Environmental Law (CEMDA)
Mexico

Panama is the last stop towards the COP17 and is a meeting that should clearly define the future of the climate regime. We are less than a year until the first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol (2008-2012) is completed, and because of the lack of definition of clear strategies to achieve the emissions reductions needed to combat the problem, this not only risks the failure of the negotiation process, but also risks the survival of humanity.

For me, Panama is not only a stop in the process, but also an opportunity to raise the voice of Latin America that has been so quiet in these negotiations. This is not a lack of willingness of the actors in the region, but rather, there is a lack of human skills and language issues.

There are many actors in the region who wish to participate and contribute with ideas and proposals, however, cultural issues are a barrier for a small percentage of players who also speak English. This hinders their interaction with various actors: other Governments and other international organizations.

Therefore, we need to take into account that climate change will affect us all and that means we all have to make efforts to address the problem, it is not enough to simply recognize that there are different views in the process. It is necessary to create the mechanisms to achieve the understanding between actors and then build a common language that allows us to address the underlying problems.

In Panama, we should leave with a clear message that there will be consolidated climate regime to establish clarity on the future of the Kyoto Protocol, as well as definitions and clarity on key issues such as technology transfer, capacity building, adaptation and others that are vitally important to move forward. Without doubt, one of the great needs that must be addressed is the definition of clear targets for reducing emissions, both by developed countries and developing countries, which play a key role in the scheme of emissions and they are positioned as future leaders of the problem.

The goal of stabilizing emissions at 450 ppm to avoid a temperature rise more than 2 ºC, is necessary and we can not afford to reduce that ambition. We are at a critical juncture; we cannot allow countries to put aside what brought us to negotiate the future of mankind and not individual interests and diversions that do nothing but deepen the problem.

Taking into account all of these, the other important issue that is a key point to achieve all of this is the financing mechanisms. Where the money is going to come from? How we are going to guarantee the creation of a strong architecture, but with money inside? This is a crucial issue in Panama and is surely going to be a key point in Durban.

Time is running out and with it the lives of many people worldwide. Everyone needs to wake up and push to make things happen. We cannot continue in this scheme of vagueness and lack of will. We cannot wait. Government, business, academia and organizations cannot let the erratic visions take over the discussions. It is our commitment to make things happen, and it is our commitment that this is done better.

The next challenge is to bring this to the national level and try to get everyone domestically to discuss the implementation of public policies in our countries. I have been working in the strengthening of a climate policy in my country, México, preparing suggestions, studies and talking with key actors. My roll in México is to make things happen by having dialogues with the legislative power, the federal government, local governments, academy and civil society. We have already achieved the allocation of 300 million dollars to go towards fighting climate change, which is not enough, so we will push for more.

Tags:

Topics:

Region:

Related Campaign:

Leadership Development Program

Related Event:

Panama 2011

The $100 Billion+ Question

Submitted by Anonymous on June 7, 2011 - 3:20am

Cancun delivered the Green Fund, now Durban must deliver the sources of finance to fill it. Where the money will come from is the $100 billion+ question governments will need to answer at the African COP.

Financial flows for climate action must be scaled up to the tune of several hundred billion dollars a year. While much of this can come from the private sector, principally for mitigation, it won’t flow without public funding to invest in capacity-building, technology R&D, creating policy and regulatory frameworks, and to leverage the private sector investments into areas where they are not now flowing.

Meanwhile REDD requires public finance investments over the next decade in the tens of billions of dollars, and adaptation requires even greater sums of public finance. It’s clear to ECO that the annual $100b figure must be almost entirely public finance to make a significant contribution to the amount of financing needed.

ECO recognizes that there are many issues on the finance agenda in Bonn – from learning the lessons of the fast-start finance (2010-2012), establishing new institutions, and deciding the scale of finance requirements. The finance issue that parties should focus most of their efforts on here in Bonn, and between now and Durban, is how to generate the public finance required.

Part of this must be from developed country budgets. But how much and from which governments must be spelled out. Durban is only one year away from the end of the fast start funding period, and there are as of yet no concrete commitments at all for the 2013 to 2019 period.

But even if we assume optimistically that governments will scale up from the fast-start levels, the problem remains. Developed countries have a tendency to provide funding that is not new and additional, but rather often comes at the expense of other existing commitments to development finance. Supplementary sources alongside government budgets will be absolutely necessary if we are to reach the levels of predictable, new and additional public finance required.

What is needed is a clearly defined and structured process to analyze, negotiate and reach conclusions on the sources of long-term finance between now and Durban. This process should involve workshops, submissions, informal Ministerials, receipt of and responses to input from past processes like the AGF and ongoing processes like those in the IMO and G20. By Durban this process should reach key conclusions on several concrete sources of finance and set out a pathway forward to operationalize them and identify further sources needed. This should include the establishment of an effort sharing approach for developed country governments’ budget contributions, and also explore a range of new and innovative sources, including international transport (bunkers), financial transaction taxes (FTTs), and Special Drawing Rights (SDRs).

A breakthrough agreement in Durban on the basic parameters of a mechanism to address emissions from international transport, that can generate finance for climate action in developing countries, would demonstrate conclusively that the multilateral process is alive and well and breaking new ground. If Durban can also get resolution on a second commitment period on the Kyoto Protocol that sends a strong signal and provides certainty to private sector investors, Durban could well be remembered as a turning point on the road to a fair, ambitious and binding global regime.

Tags:

Financial transaction taxes

SDRs

Special Drawing Rights

Topics:

Finance

Related Event:

Bonn June 2011

Anonymous's blog

CAN Submission - LCA Agenda Proposal - April 2011

Submitted by MBrockley on April 6, 2011 - 2:00am

CAN_LCA_Agenda_Proposal.pdf

LCA

This process must deliver concrete action to ambitiously address the climate change challenge. We need an agenda and a work plan to deliver on that by Durban.
The agenda discussions are important because they frame what countries want to, and will be able to, achieve in Durban.

CAN agrees with the sentiment expressed by many countries in the LCA opening last night, including EU, Australia, Norway, AOSIS, Singapore, Egypt, Chile on behalf of a number of Latin American countries, Pakistan, Philippines and China that we should use 2011 to BOTH implement the Cancun Agreements AND fill in the gaps that clearly resolve the issues that address the challenge of climate change (gigatonne gap, finance sources and others) that remain. This is easily possible by merging the various proposals for agendas as outlined below .
The priority issues for 2011 are italicised under the relevant heading. Where time allows, additional issues can be addressed in 2011. Issues that parties have agreed to address in other agendas (such as SB) should be focused there.

1. Opening of the session

2.   Organisational matters
a.   Adoption of the agenda
b.   Organisation of the work of the session

3. Preparation of an outcome to be presented to the Conference of the Parties for adoption at its seventeenth session to enable the full, effective and sustained implementation of the Convention through long-term cooperative action now, up to and beyond 2012.

3.1 a shared vision for long-term cooperative action
a) Global goal for emission reductions and global peaking
[Item 3 of the supplementary provisional agenda]

3.2 Mitigation
a) Registry
[Item 7 of the supplementary provisional agenda]

3.2.1 Mitigation commitments or actions by developed country Parties
a) Work programme on enhanced measurement, reporting and verification for Parties included in Annex I to the Convention
[Item 5 of the supplementary provisional agenda]

b) Quantified economy-wide emission reduction targets to be implemented by Parties included in Annex I to the Convention.
[Item 4bis of the supplementary provisional agenda]

c) Options and ways to increase the level of ambition of developed country Party economy-wide emission reduction targets
[Item 17(c) of the supplementary provisional agenda]

3.2.2 Nationally appropriate mitigation actions by developing country Parties
a) Work programme on enhanced measurement, reporting and verification for Parties not included in Annex I to the Convention
[Item 6 of the supplementary provisional agenda]

b) Nationally appropriate mitigation actions to be implemented by Parties not included in Annex I to the Convention.
[Item 4ter of the supplementary provisional agenda]

3.2.3 Policy approaches and positive incentives on issues relating to reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries; and the role of conservation, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks in developing countries
a) Financing options for the full implementation of mitigation action in the forest sector
[Item 8 of the supplementary provisional agenda]

3.2.4 Cooperative sectoral approaches and sector-specifc actions, in order to enhance the implementation of article 4.1.c of the Convention

3.2.5 Various approaches to enhance cost effectiveness of mitigation actions

Combined sub-items for 3.2.4 and 3.2.5:
a) Market-based and non-marked-based mechanisms
[Item 11 of the supplementary provisional agenda]

b) Agriculture
[Item 17(d) of the supplementary provisional agenda]

3.3 Enhance action on adaptation
a) Adaptation Committee
[Item 4 of the supplementary provisional agenda]

3.4 Enhanced action on technology development and transfer
Arrangements to fully operationalize the Technology Mechanism
[Item 12 of the supplementary provisional agenda]

3.5 Capacity Building
[Item 13 of the supplementary provisional agenda]

3.6 Enhanced action on the provision of financial resources and investment
a) Standing Committee
[Item 9 of the supplementary provisional agenda]

b) Scaled-up, new and additional, predictable and adequate funding to developing countries,in accordance with paragraph 97 of the Cancun Agreements
[Item 9 of the supplementary provisional agenda]

c) Review of information provided by developed countries on the resources provided to fulfil fast-start finance commitments
[Item 17(b) of the supplementary provisional agenda]

4. Review: further definition of its scope and development of its modalities
[Item 14 of the supplementary provisional agenda]

5. Legal options for an agreed outcome with the continued mandate of the AWGLCA
[Item 16 of the supplementary provisional agenda]

6. Other matters
a) International aviation and maritime transport;
[Item 17c of the supplementary provisional agenda]

b) any other matters

7.   Work Programme 2011
CAN expects Bangkok to agree a detailed work programme for 2011, containing
-   the number of sessions this year;
-   What issues will be dealt with and when;
-   Number, timing and content of technical workshops;
-   Invitations for submissions from Parties and observers;
-   Technical papers, etc.

8. Report of the session

Tags: