9 November 2015, Energy Post, The biggest sticking point in Paris: money. In the run-up to the Paris climate change conference, there is much focus on countries’ voluntary commitments to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (their so-called Intended Nationally Determined Contributions). But much less attention is paid to a part of the negotiations that is just as important, writes Henrik Selin of Boston University: how to finance the efforts of developing countries at mitigation and adaptation. The national climate plans (INDCs) are, of course, a significant aspect of any global effort to address the climate change threat. But another critical policy issue that is at the center of the Paris agenda is an age-old one: money. Going into the negotiations, there is a goal to scale up existing efforts toward providing US$100 billion a year to support climate change action primarily in developing countries by 2020. Ideally, these efforts should also contribute to long-term sustainable development. Many Paris financing debates will focus on how to most appropriately use the recently created Green Climate Fund (GCF) – the new main multilateral vehicle for helping developing countries to lower their GHG emissions and adapt to the effects of climate change. However, there remain significant questions about how the GCF will function, how it will operate alongside other organizations, and how effective the overall financing system may be. Indeed, the unresolved money question was front and center in the just-concluded Bonn talks, which were intended to pave the way for a Paris agreement. How will it work? Read More here
Category Archives: Global Action Inaction
6 November 2015, The conversation, Citizens, arrests, and 7-metre dinosaurs: the history of UN climate summit protests. Here’s a scene that will be familiar to anyone who has watched media coverage of a major geopolitical summit: “By mid-morning the main entrance to the UN’s Palais de Congres, and its side entrances, were ringed by Swiss and German citizens, chained together. The blockade was total, if symbolic. Diplomats came and went, but had to duck under the chains. A barrage balloon floated in the sky over the Palais, urging delegates to “Cut C0₂ Now”. Boiler-suited Greenpeace activists swarmed over the roofs of the Palais, clutching placards bearing the same message.” That was 25 years ago this weekend, outside the Second World Climate Conference in Geneva, as recounted (p.21) by British author and activist Jeremy Leggett. Leggett also noted the “uncharacteristic leniency” of the attendant riot police, which he claimed was down to the Swiss government’s wish “to be seen to be under citizen pressure” to help enact its proposed carbon tax. What this episode shows – besides the wearying persistence of the same issues a quarter-century later – is that the climate protest movement predates what many people think of as the formal beginning of the United Nations climate process: the 1992 Rio Earth Summit. Nor was it the first such protest. An estimated 10,000 people rallied outside the 1972 Stockholm Environment Conference, the UN’s first ever environmental summit – albeit over a wider range of issues and at a time when climate concerns were the preserve of only the most well-informed. Read More here
6 November 2015, Carbon Brief, Look beyond emissions gap to see full force of climate pledges, says UNEP report. Climate pledges submitted to the UN reduce the emissions gap between current action and what is needed to avoid dangerous climate change, with social and political effects that reach far beyond their impact on aggregate emissions. That’s the optimistic conclusion of the latest UN Environment Programme (UNEP)Emissions Gap Report, published this morning. Nevertheless, it confirms that the collective ambition of Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) is “far from enough”, leaving a “very significant” emissions gap in 2030. The analysis comes just a week after a similar report from the UN climate body the UNFCCC, which aggregated the impact of the 119 INDCs submitted by 1 October. While many of the conclusions are similar, today’s UNEP report goes beyond a simple adding up pledges and considers the wider impacts of the INDCs, as well as options for closing the emissions gap through enhanced action, sub-national initiatives and efforts to reduce deforestation. Bending the curve. Like last week’s report, UNEP concludes that the INDCs represent a real increase in ambition, compared to the policies in place before the pledges were made. Some of the INDCs include both conditional and unconditional elements. However, even if fully implemented, the INDCs would leave emissions on an upwards trajectory in 2030, UNEP says.
A gap of 12-14 gigatonnes of CO2 equivalent remains between emissions in 2030 and the cost-effective path to staying below 2C, it concludes. The 2C limit is the internationally agreed goal for avoiding the worst effects of climate change. All these points are illustrated on the UNEP graphic, below. The baseline scenario shows what might have happened to emissions if no new climate policies had been implemented after 2010. Current policies means what was in place before any INDCs were submitted in March. Read More here
6 November 2015, Renew Economy, Big step finally taken towards making your fridge and air-con climate friendly. It’s hard to imagine the rhetoric soaring to greater heights. “A great signal for Paris”,”a much needed shot in the arm for climate action”, “provide an example of successful international cooperation”, “provide critical momentum for the climate negotiations”, “a strong signal to the UNFCCC to adopt a robust agreement at COP 21”, “boosting global cooperation ahead of Paris to benefit the planet”… Expectations were almost palpable. “A singular opportunity for countries to take action on climate”,”would set the stage for an ambitious and durable global climate agreement”, “lay the foundation for a global agreement in Paris that will protect generations to come”, “demonstrate that governments around the world have the political will to take bold action to avert a climate catastrophe”, “potentially catalyse far-reaching action at Paris”… Stirring stuff indeed, but who’d have guessed what all the fuss was about? You’d be forgiven for missing the muted clamour anticipating a long overdue agreement on the need to respond to the science calling for international action on the world’s most powerful and rapidly growing greenhouse gases. In a much anticipated gathering of the global community of nations in Dubai over the past week, intense negotiations have been taking place. The ultimate goal of the talks, which began in 2008, is to amend the Montreal Protocol to formally address the need to address the alarmingly rapid rise of the hydrofluorocarbons, or HFCs, highly potent greenhouse gases used across the refrigeration and air conditioning industries. A recent NASA study reported to the meeting also confirmed that contrary to previous understanding HFCs do have a small yet significant effect on ozone depletion, a point poignantly underscored by the appearance of the third largest Ozone hole this year. Read More here