Showing posts with label cancun climate summit. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cancun climate summit. Show all posts

Friday, December 10, 2010

Climate draft text signals breakthroughs


















Negotiators made breakthroughs in key areas of contention at the Cancun climate talks late Friday, producing a draft text that commits all countries to step up their efforts to limit the rise in global temperatures to less than 2 degrees Celsius and leaves open the possibility of new commitments under the Kyoto Protocol.

In a surprise move, as delegates were preparing for a gruelling overnight session, Mexican chairwoman Patricia Espinosa released draft texts of agreements approved by 50 countries that were charged with finding compromises to what many believed were becoming intractable positions. But the agreements fell well short of an overarching accord that could form the basis of a new treaty, and it remained unclear whether it would pass the full convention.

In an informal session aimed at giving countries the opportunity to object and spark further talks, Ms. Espinosa received a 75-second standing ovation and no objections. She then adjourned to begin a final debate that was expected to last well into the night.

“If this gets approved, we are much further than we thought we would be before coming to Cancun,” said Wendy Trio, climate policy director for Greenpeace. “We now await the response from countries and urge them to adopt it.”

Negotiators from 193 countries have had to marry vastly different approaches that were contained in the 1997 Kyoto agreement and the 2009 Copenhagen Accord, which resulted in non-binding emission pledges from countries such as the United States, China, India and Brazil that were not covered by Kyoto commitments.

The draft text refers to the commitment to extend Kyoto with a new round of emission-reduction targets for the post-2012 period. Japan and Russia had explicitly rejected such an approach, and Russia’s objection was footnoted in the text. Canada had refused to provide a commitment to new Kyoto targets but never ruled it out. Environment Minister John Baird said earlier Friday that the government had not “closed any doors” as negotiators sought to find compromises to keep the talks alive.

A spokesman for Mr. Baird said Friday night that Canadian officials were studying the texts and could not comment on their content.

Zoe Caron, a climate-change researcher with WWF Canada, said the tough decisions on Kyoto have been put off until next year, as Canadian negotiator Guy St. Jacques had earlier suggested they would be. She said the Harper government may simply decide to transform its current 2020 target, made at last year’s Copenhagen Accord, into any new Kyoto deal, though Canada would also face a penalty for missing its 2012 goal.

“Their position is that the Kyoto Protocol is not enough on its own, and I expect they also understand that is it the core element of a larger legal deal [to be negotiated] moving forward,” Ms. Caron said.

The proposed agreements would endorse the view that “climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our time” and requires “long-term co-operative action” in order to prevent catastrophic impacts across the planet. And they pledged that countries would consider strengthening the long-term goal to limit the increase to 1.5 degrees, something demanded by small island states who fear the 2-degree target would leave their countries literally under water as a result of rising sea levels.

However, it remains unclear how those ambitious targets will be achieved. In a report released at the beginning of the conference, the United Nations Environment Program said the commitments made under Copenhagen fell far short of what is needed to meet the 2-degree goal. If all countries met the upper end of their promises and delivered all the funding to help poorer countries slow emissions growth, the world would emit 49 gigatonnes of greenhouse gases by 2020, five gigatonnes higher than required to meet the target, the agency said.

Under the proposed deal, countries would set up a "Green Climate Fund" that would manage most of the $100-billion (U.S.) per year promised to poor countries by the developed world; set up technology-transfer programs to help them adopt renewable energy technologies, and fund projects to reduce deforestation and encourage tree planting.

Following the lead of the United States, Canada has pledged to reduce its emissions by 17 per cent from 2005 levels by 2020. Mr. Baird told the summit the Canadian government is working to meet that commitment, though it has yet to produce a plan to get there. Ottawa has introduced new emission standards for automobiles and is moving on ships, airplanes and heavy trucks; it has also promised to pass regulations that will force the power sector to end its reliance on high-emitting coal over the next two decades. But it has not regulated the fastest growing source of emissions: Alberta’s booming oil sands.

In a briefing Friday afternoon, Canadian officials appeared cautiously optimistic that negotiators were closing the gaps in key areas, though Canada was not involved in many of the key sessions.

The United States had insisted the Cancun summit must recognize the political agreement reached in Copenhagen last year, including the emissions pledges. Backed by Canada, the Americans were also insistent that China, India, Brazil and other major developing countries agree to have their plans to reduce the rate of emissions growth monitored and verified by the international community. The developing countries have agreed to a review process, though one that is not as rigorous as the regime for developed countries.

Read More

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/climate-draft-text-signals-breakthroughs/article1832783/

Thursday, December 9, 2010

As climate-change talks continue, lack of consensus spurs smaller-scale actions




CANCUN, MEXICO - In response to growing frustration that the U.N. climate negotiations are not producing real-world results, individual nations, states and business are cobbling together patchwork solutions to preserve forests, produce clean energy and scrub pollution from the air.

Under this new approach, businesses in California will offset their greenhouse gas emissions by funding tropical forest preservation in Mexico and Brazil; Japan will help pay for nuclear power plants in developing nations; and South Korea will invest in promoting renewable energy at home.

But the central question remains: Will a bottom-up network of ad hoc arrangements and bilateral deals be enough to avert dangerous climate change?

For years, international policymakers operated on the assumption that they would develop a successor to the landmark 1997 Kyoto Protocol, the only legally binding international accord to reduce greenhouse gases. They expected to agree on a common path for cutting the world's carbon output, dole out key nations' specific obligations and create a common market for trading greenhouse emissions. That vision has evaporated, replaced by a much looser web of climate-related efforts across the globe.

"The web of them together is an international architecture," said Robert Stavins, who directs Harvard University's environmental economics program. "You'll see a bottom-up linkage of climate policies that are very different between countries, regions, and even on the sub-national level."

The advantage of the U.N.-led talks taking place here - increasingly frenzied as they go into the final day Friday - is that they offer every country big and small the ability to argue its case. But the failure of political leadership and lack of a consensus among rich, poor and rapidly developing nations is forcing a departure from the way the world has approached climate-change policy for the past two decades.

Brazil's climate-change ambassador, Sergio Serra, described the U.N. climate negotiations as "on life support" and the goals for this conference so modest that "we are just trying to keep things honorably alive."

In an interview Thursday, Mexican President Felipe Calderon predicted the talks would produce meaningful results by week's end, but he expressed frustration with the cumbersome U.N. process. If negotiations fail, he added, Mexico would push for "a change in the rules."

"I am not allowing another 10 years to go by before we pass an agreement," he said.

Meanwhile, countries and regions are pressing ahead with their own mandatory limits on greenhouse gas emissions that will involve carbon trading systems - allowing companies to compensate for their emissions by buying credits that are used to invest in pollution-reducing projects in other parts of the world.

"That could open the door for ties between industrialized nations such as Australia, Japan and those in the European Union and developing countries," Serra said. That is good, he said, "though it remains unclear how this will work, since each trading system may involve a different set of rules."

Jake Schmidt, who directs international climate policy for the Natural Resources Defense Fund, an advocacy group, said, "Countries aren't just sitting and waiting for this international agreement to deliver."

On the state level, California recently announced that starting in 2012 it would allow companies forced to cut their carbon output to offset some of their emissions by supporting certified forest protection projects in the Brazilian state of Acre and the Mexican state of Chiapas. Linda Adams, California's secretary for environmental protection, said at a panel in Cancun that the decision will "pave the way for others to be part of our carbon market."

Even developing countries that are not bound by mandatory limits yet are looking at ways to cut their greenhouse gases. Mexico is examining how to convert its urban solid waste into energy, for example, while some of its farmers are producing shade-grown coffee for Starbucks using practices that sequester carbon.

Steve Cochran, vice president for climate and air at the Environmental Defense Fund advocacy group, said this new period of experimentation could lay the foundation for a more ambitious global effort in the future.

"People need to see, touch and feel that some of this stuff actually works," he said. "And when they do that, they'll be willing to take broader steps."

But even the emerging approaches, such as donations from rich countries to poor ones to conserve their forests, need to work out some kinks. On Wednesday, Guyana's President Bharrat Jagdeo publicly questioned why it's taking so long to get its first installment of funds under a $250 million forest conservation agreement with Norway.

"The international community has a very poor track record of delivering help," he said, blaming World Bank officials for a recent delay. Yvonne Tsikata, World Bank country director for the Caribbean, said in a statement that her institution was just serving as a "financial intermediary" and was awaiting the sign-off from a steering committee comprising officials from Guyana and Norway before transferring the funds.

In the meantime, representatives from nations most vulnerable to climate change said they still needed a global agreement - and soon. The current emissions pledges that industrialized and developing countries have made as part of the U.N. process fall well short of ensuring global temperatures don't exceed 3.6 degrees above pre-industrial levels, which many scientists agree could be a significant tipping point.

"Individual actions by themselves cannot substitute for international governance," said Grenada's permanent U.N. representative, Dessima Williams, who chairs a coalition of 43 small island nations threatened by rising sea levels. "We realize the multilateral process is complex and long-term. We have been in it, and we're in it for the long haul. Our problem is the islands are really suffering."

These annual negotiations, formally known as the Conference of Parties (COP), have taken place for the past 16 years and now even some senior U.N. diplomats and advisers have raised the question of whether it's worth imposing an expiration date.

"Which COP will be the final one for a decision?" asked one top U.N. official here, who asked not to be identified because he was not authorized to speak on the subject. "Are we just going to go on and on?"


Read More

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/09/AR2010120906727.html

Wednesday, December 8, 2010

Climate talks: Cancun may deliver statement at Durban in 2011




In a big step forward, negotiators from 194 nations are looking at a Copenhagen Accord like statement, which may be adopted at the Cancun climate talks, unlike the accord of which the summit had only taken note of. Backroom negotiations continued late in the night to workout a comprehensive statement having information annexers listing the pledges of different countries. Japan, which has got the Kyoto Protocol almost killed, is insisting that its commitments should not be mentioned in the information annexure.

An Indian negotiator said all issues have been sorted out except on mitigation and finance. "We except brief paras in the Cancun statement on these issues once an agreement is reached on broad parameters," he said.

India has, however, failed to convince Japan to agree for a second commitment period for Kyoto Protocol. "They have not agreed," he said.

The Cancun summit appears to be heading to a Copenhagen like finish with the host nation Mexico trying its best to get something out of the summit. "We expect a comprehensive binding statement from the summit," an official said. Exact details of the statement were not known.

Read More

http://www.hindustantimes.com/americas/Climate-talks-Cancun-may-deliver-statement-at-Durban-in-2011/636196/H1-Article1-636218.aspx

Monday, December 6, 2010

What climate deal may be agreed in Cancun?





Countries in talks at Mexico's Cancun beach resort are split over how to toughen existing pledges to cut carbon emissions, made at last year's Copenhagen summit which ended in a brief, non-binding agreement.

Issues that hinge on a deal on emissions include long-term climate aid for developing countries and payments to tropical nations to protect their forests.

Following are areas of possible agreement at the November 29-December 10 talks:

* Extending the Kyoto Protocol

- Decide whether to continue the protocol, as favored by developing countries. Its first round of targets ends in 2012

- Decide on the length of commitment period of the next round of targets, for example whether to 2017 or 2020

- Decide whether to cancel surplus, tradable emissions credits owned by countries that are well below their 2008-2012 Kyoto targets. Credits are called assigned amount units (AAUs) * Emissions targets

- Decide new national targets either under the 1997 Kyoto Protocol or the 1992 U.N. climate convention, or both

- Some industrialized countries do not like Kyoto, as so far it has only controlled the emissions of developed countries. A way out may be to note new targets in an appendix to Kyoto and the convention

- Refer to a long-term goal, for example to limit warming to less than 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees F)

- Mention the widely held scientific view that emissions targets pledged so far are too weak

- Review in 2013-2015 whether targets need strengthening * Measurement

- Also called measurement, reporting and verification (MRV)

- Agree to measure developed country emissions, for example annually, and also their contribution to climate aid funds

- Agree to measure developing countries greenhouse gases and their actions to slow emissions growth, perhaps every two to four years

- Agree common accounting standards, for example on measuring carbon emissions from forests * Protecting rainforests

Read More

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6B60GH20101207