Efforts at fashioning a joining stitch between negotiators for rich and poor countries to create a viable working document for COP17 next November remain stymied today as the Bonn Climate Talks enter week two. Friction over appropriate climate aid mechanisms and the transparency and integrity of methods for measuring and reporting GHG emission reductions have combined to create a pressure cooker atmosphere.
Coupled with the fizzling hopes of facilitating a renewal of the Kyoto Protocol by the expiration of Phase I in 2012, division among the parties regarding another round of talks this fall is presenting an additional hurdle: South African officials announce they have been approached to hold one or two meetings while Reuters reports that developed countries have not agreed to provide funds for additional talks.
"This will depend, among other things, on the extent of progress made here in Bonn, and whether the political will among parties exists for a further session," the head of the EU delegation, Artur Runge-Metzger, told the news agency. (Bleak outlook in Bonn as row brews over autumn talks. Business Green. June 13, 2011)
Meanwhile, The World Resource Institute today delivered an insightful and motivating analysis of the gridlock which so far has impeded progress in Bonn. In Second Week of Bonn Climate Negotiations Provides Chance to Build Bridges, WRI maintains that much of last week's difficulties stemmed from serious considerations: designing a work plan when the number of issues to be negotiated continues to expand as time runs out; developing trust among the parties on their intent to honor the Cancun Agreements; and insuring transparency and timely action on climate finance.
... many countries are playing a long game of chess – anticipating what the outcomes might be many steps in advance, fearing those outcomes, and consequently shutting down conversations before they have a chance to begin. The net result is that the wider group is prevented from speaking about issues where progress could be made and so once again substance becomes the hostage of technicalities and the session becomes dominated by process fights. The erosion of trust is clearly damaging for this particular gathering in Bonn but more broadly it is corrosive for the UNFCCC as a whole.
Moving into Week 2, WRI calls on the negotiators to be architects "with a view of the big picture and a vision for where this process needs to go in the short, medium and long-term ... and engineers to "concentrate on building the technical parts of this process that are vital to maintaining its structural integrity whichever vision emerges."
Central to this is the debate on measurement, reporting, and verification (MRV). Whether on action, adaptation or finance, Parties clearly need information that is complete, consistent, and comparable.This means having a realistic vision of where progress can be made between now and Durban, capitalizing on areas where a great deal of agreement already exists, and parking remaining issues for another day.
Climate Financing
The WRI has also released a preliminary analysison countries’ immediate “fast start” climate finance pledges announced thus far.
Based on our research, as of May 9, 2011, 21 developed countries and the European Commission have publicly announced their individual fast-start finance pledges, which total USD 28.14 billion. While this represents a significant step in the right direction, developed countries still have much to do in meeting their fast-start pledge.
The Cancun Agreements mandate that fast-start funds have a “balanced allocation between adaptation and mitigation,” are “new and additional,” are “prioritized for the most vulnerable developing countries, such as the least developed countries, small island developing States and Africa,” and include “forestry and investments through international institutions.” It is not clear that developed countries’ fast-start finance contributions fulfill these criteria.
Financial Transaction Tax & The Climate Fund
Just last week, CIDSE, the international alliance of Catholic global justice development agencies, released a report which determined a 0.05% Financial Transaction Tax (FTT) would raise €465bn - to tackle climate change and poverty across the world.
CIDSE cites two requisite factors for the FTT to be effective and just:
* Cross-sector coordination must be an essential function of the mechanism allocating climate finance,because the fight against climate change covers several sectors of government activity including finance, agriculture, food security, water management, health, safety, and infrastructure.
* All climate funding must respect people's social and environmental rights, guaranteeing meaningful and effective consultation of local communities so that climate action does not take place at their expense.
"The FTT is really ‘A tiny tax on finance, but a giant leap for the climate fund’," writes GCCA Global Campaign Director Paul Horsman. "With an eye towards the G20 in November and using the upcoming EU Finance Ministers meeting on the 15th June and the European Council meeting on the 23rd-24th June as a focal point the campaign aims to ensure that the FTT is up there to help assist developing countries to alleviate poverty and adapt to the impacts of climate change."
GCCA youth activities this week are focusing on "the benefits of a financial transaction tax (FTT) as an innovative source of money for the climate fund, Push Europe to a 30% target for green house gas emissions and search out the ‘superhero’s here in the talks!" (Read Horsman's 6/13 Daily Tck and download GCCA's Financial Transaction Tax Campaign toolkit ( French, Spanish and Portuguese, English).
Recommended Reads 6/13
• Florent Baarsch writing for Adopt a Negotiator on When gaps become abyss
Several times in the recent history of the climate negotiations, developed and developing countries agreed on keeping the increase of the global average temperature below 2°C. However, following what the countries pledged in Copenhagen in 2009 and after in Cancun in 2010, the emission reduction pledges will not be enough to meet this 2°C goal.
The NRDC's climate policy director Jake Schmidt analyzes the US
Annual Energy Outlook 2011 to respond to the perceived concensus among other countries that “American action on global warming is lost for the foreseeable future.”
In his report Where are US Global Warming Emissions Headed? New analysis gives us some hints, he notes that the EIA concluded that "US emissions will be below 2005 levels for the next 15 years and could be reduced even further if the Administration implemented EPA and other rules in a strong fashion."
Without any new policies, US energy-related CO2 emissions* will be below 2005 levels for the next 15 years. In 2020, US emissions without new policies are projected to be 4% below 2005 levels and won’t surpass 2005 levels until 2027, according to EIA’s reference scenario (see figure). This reflects the adoption of no new policies, but does include recent existing policies such as the renewable and energy efficiency investments in the stimulus, the CO2 tailpipe and fuel economy standards for cars and light trucks through 2016 adopted by President Obama in early 2010, new appliance efficiency standards recently put into effect (see here, here, here, and here), state-level greenhouse gas programs such as the ones in California and the Northeast, state-level requirements that a certain portion of electricity is produced from renewable sources. The scenario also includes increased use of natural gas in the electricity sector mostly as a result of tapping into shale gas, growing use of renewable technologies and fuels (partly as a result of the stimulus investments and the state level policies), and other general economic trends.
Fossil of the Day: Monday 6/13:
Saudi Arabia and Qatar try their best to be the worst on Monday at the UN Climate Talks
The first place fossil went to Saudi Arabia. In discussions on the loss and damage work programme, Saudi Arabia argued that the Parties did not need to agree its activities until COP18 – 18 months from now! The Cancun Agreements established a work programme to enable Parties to take a decision on loss and damage itself – not the work programme. Debating the activities of a work programme for 18 months is akin to debating an agenda for 18 months…and we’ve seen enough debates on agendas.
The (2nd) place fossil goes to Qatar for suggesting that they should get compensated for the tax that developed countries add onto Qatari oil. At the Joint SBSTA/SBI Meeting on Impact of the implementation of response measure, Qatar presented a graph and emphasised that taxes in developed countries add more to the selling price of oil than their wholesale price. For example in UK oil initial price is $200 and the tax is $ 850 that sums to be $1,050. Then Qatar had the gall to suggest that if developed countries were to give the tax amount to Qatar, then Qatar is happy to provide the Oil for free. This tax money should clearly be spent on developing green alternatives to carbon based transport and to deal with the problems that carbon based transport create – health, environmental etc – not to compensate oil producing countries. Any potential future COP host would know that (hint hint).
Follow Coverage of the Bonn Climate Talks at Beyond Kyoto.
All photos from Adopt A Negotiator's Flickr Stream
9:07 PM PT: http://ht.ly/... ICN overview of Bonn Talks concise read
Report from Bonn Climate Change Conference | Bonn Conference on Climate Change, UN Framework Conference on Climate Change, UNFCCC,Fr Seán McDonagh, SSC
At the end of the first week of the Bonn Conference on Climate Change, the first thing which comes to mind is how little coverage this vitally important negotiation session is receiving the world media. A favourable outcome from the Bonn Conference is essential if the UN Framework Conference on Climate Change (UNFCCC) which is to meet later in the year in Durban, South Africa, is to succeed. As the Kyoto Protocol runs out in 2012, Durban must deliver a fair, ambitious and binding climate change treaty. The top priority in that treaty must be the ambition to close the gigatonne gap which the United Nation Environment Programme (UNEP) estimates at between 5-9 gigatonnes.
Tue Jun 14, 2011 at 12:00 AM PT: Climate Gap: Who is Committed and What Can Be Done!
(SOP newswire2) Today, Ambassador Pablo Solon of the Plurinational State of Bolivia addressed reporters at the UN climate talks in Germany. Ambassador Solon outlined a clear plan, based on submissions from other countries and civil society, on how to move the talks forward in 2011.
“The key issue at these talks is the gap between how much climate pollution we need to reduce and how much countries are committed to reducing. We call that the “gap” and it`s the difference between 4C of warming and 2C of warming. The Cancun outcome sets us on a path to 4C.” Ambassador Solon Said.
“Some countries want to talk about the `rules` first, instead of this gap in commitment, but we know that rules will not reduce this gap. Fixing rules will simply prevent the gap from increasing, it won`t set about actually reducing emissions. The heart of the matter is the depth of pollution cuts.” Ambassador Solon said. 6/13/2011
read whole story @ http://pwccc.wordpress.com/...
Tue Jun 14, 2011 at 11:43 AM PT: Bolivia webcast on how to close the emission gap
http://unfccc2.meta-fusion.com/...