17th December 2009EmailPrintComments Ethiopian PM justifies fund scaleback for reliable flows
Copenhagen Bella Center where the United Nations Climate Change Conference is held.
African negotiators at the Climate Change meeting here yesterday woke up to a surprise when some of their colleagues unilaterally decided to compose a text for presentation to the COP 15 Presidency contrary to earlier agreement.
Cited as the Joint Appeal of France and Ethiopia, representing Africa, for an Ambitious Copenhagen Accord, the text read that the two launch an appeal to all parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change to adopt an ambitious agreement on December 18 limiting the increase of temperatures to 2C above compared to pre-industrial times as recommended by the IPCC, and ensuring that vulnerable countries will receive adequate financing to face the challenge.
“This is ridiculous,” lashed out a delegate from Tanzania.
“Since when has France represented Africa in the climate change negotiations? And this temperature increase; we had agreed the increase to be 1.5C and not what is written in this text,” he said, obviously angered by the unprecedented twist of events. Ethiopia is the Chair for Africa Climate Change negotiations.
The Guardian has further learnt that initially the African countries had pushed for the adoption of a “fast-start” fund of 600 billion US dollars per year covering the next three years—2010, 2011 and 2012 but well placed sources said France and Ethiopia have cut the figure to 10 billion US dollars for the next three years, way below the required amount.
Visibly furious about the U-turn engineered by Ethiopia and France, some of the African negotiators who spoke to this newspaper on condition of anonymity said the draft document indicated that 40 per cent of the fund should be dedicated to adaptation in Africa while the agreement was 50 per cent of the fund.
“We don’t understand what’s happening. Everybody is totally confused at this turn of events,” fumed one of the African delegates.
Speaking at the U.N. climate talks, the Ethiopian PM Zenawi referring to the changes admitted: "I know my proposal today will disappoint some Africans. My proposal scales back our expectation with respect to the level of funding in return for more reliable funding," he said.
Zenawi supported $100 billion annual funds by 2020 from rich nations to help the developing world fight climate change.
When asked for a response, Chinese negotiators said they could not comment directly on the figure but expressed backing for the stance of African nations.
"China has always been supportive of the developing countries strong position and just demands on the financing issue," said Climate Change Ambassador Yu Qingtai.
China has already said it does not expect to be the first in line for any funds from the rich world. Yu's comments suggested that Beijing would not stand in the way of a deal backed by most of the developing world.
The European Union has previously proposed rich nation funds by 2020 of about $150 billion. British Prime Minister Gordon Brown has spoken of $100 billion.
U.S. chief climate envoy Todd Stern declined immediate comment on the African proposal -- "I have heard there is one (proposal on finance) but I haven't seen the details yet so we will be interested in looking at it."
Zenawi said funding to help the developing world prepare for climate change and curb carbon emissions should start by 2013, reaching "up to $50 billion per annum by 2015 and $100 billion per annum by 2020."
"No less than 50 per cent should be allocated to adaptation to vulnerable and poor countries and regions such as African and small islands states."
The Catholic development group CAFOD said Zenawi had gone too far with his compromise.
"At this late stage of the negotiations, this figure being tabled by Africa is disappointing to say the least," said Liz Gallagher, CAFOD's climate finance specialist, adding the Africa group earlier this week had demanded $400 billion per year.
Rich countries could raise the funds using a wide range of mechanisms, including taxes on shipping and jet fuel or sales of emissions rights, said Zenawi -- hinting Africa would not insist on public money.
Developing countries have so far insisted that funds should come from public sources, something that recession-hit, industrialised countries have rejected saying only the private sector can raise the sums required.
The draft document, seen by ‘The Guardian’, states that a high-level group composed of developed and developing countries’ experts will bring forward recommendations with a preliminary report to be presented no later than the next G20 summit in Canada, and its final report no later that the November 2010 G20 summit in Korea.
“The G20 summits have nothing to do with the Copenhagen climate change negotiations. It is ridiculous,” said the shocked African delegates. The situation has seriously angered some delegates because some of them spent the whole Tuesday night working on “the official document” only to be frustrated by the new version.
Meanwhile, the Danish President of the U.N. Climate Conference, Connie Hedegaard, has resigned and will be replaced by the Danish Prime Minister, Lars Lokke Rasmussen, as head of the historic talks.
The change was announced yesterday as the 193-nation conference enters a higher phase of negotiations, with 115world leaders arriving by Thursday.
U.N. Climate Chief Yvo de Boer said Hedegaard will continue to lead informal talks but Prime Minister Rasmussen will now be the formal head of the conference.
Hedegaard says it's appropriate for Rasmussen to preside with so many heads of state and government taking part.
SOURCE: THE GUARDIAN
17 December 2009
11 December 2009
10 December 2009
what is the Copenhagen climate change summit?
Abigail Edge and David Adam guardian.co.uk, Friday 1 May 2009 15.47 BST Article history, What is the Copenhagen climate change summit?
From 7 December environment ministers and officials will meet in Copenhagen for the United Nations climate conference to thrash out a successor to the Kyoto protocol. The conference, held at the modern Bella Center, will run for two weeks. The talks are the latest in an annual series of UN meetings that trace their origins to the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio, which aimed at coordinating international action against climate change.
What does COP15 stand for?
COP15 is the official name of the Copenhagen climate change summit — the 15th Conference of the Parties (COP) under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The COP is the highest body of the UNFCCC and consists of environment ministers who meet once a year to discuss developments in the convention.
Which countries are taking part in the climate change summit, and how many people will be there?
One hundred and ninety-two countries have signed the climate change convention. More than 15,000 officials, advisers, diplomats, campaigners and journalists are expected to attend COP15, joined by heads of state and government.
Who are the main players?
Developing countries, including China and India, believe it is the responsibility of wealthy industrialised nations such as the UK and US to set a clear example on cutting carbon emissions. Significantly, the US rejected the 1997 Kyoto protocol, with George Bush arguing that the 5% reductions required by Kyoto would "wreck [the American] economy" while making no demands on emerging economies. COP15's chances of success have been improved by President Barack Obama's stated intention to achieve an 80% reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.
In April, the secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, acknowledged the role the US had played in past climate emissions at a gathering of officials from the world's 17 largest economies. She said the US was "determined to make up for lost time both at home and abroad". "The US is no longer absent without leave," she said. However, Denmark's minister for climate and energy, Connie Hedegaard, has warned that American leadership on climate change will be undermined if the Obama administration does not pass laws swiftly to reduce carbon pollution.
What does the summit hope to achieve?
Officials will try to agree a new climate treaty as a successor to the Kyoto protocol, the first phase of which expires in 2012. According to Yvo de Boer, executive secretary of the UNFCCC, the four essentials needing an international agreement in Copenhagen are:
1 How much are industrialised countries willing to reduce their emissions of greenhouse gases?
2 How much are major developing countries such as China and India willing to do to limit the growth of their emissions?
3 How is the help needed by developing countries to engage in reducing their emissions and adapting to the impacts of climate change going to be financed?
4 How is that money going to be managed?
What are the sticking points?
The main issue is that of "burden-sharing". Climate scientists say that the world must stop the growth in greenhouse gas emissions and start making them fall from around 2015 to 2020. By 2050 they estimate the world must cut its emissions by 80% compared with 1990 levels to limit global warming to a 2C average rise.
Money is also a major issue. The developing countries know they must hand over hundreds of billions of pounds to poorer nations, to help them adapt to the likely consequences. Earlier this year, Gordon Brown said this climate funding needed to reach $100bn a year by 2020. If the recent recession has made rich countries less willing to part with their cash, this could raise tensions in Copenhagen
But which countries must make the cuts and by how large should they be? For example, the rapidly growing Chinese economy has recently overtaken America as the world's largest emitter of carbon dioxide. Yet America has historically emitted far more emissions than China, and on a per capita basis Chinese emissions are around a quarter of those of the US.
The Chinese government argues that it has a moral right to develop and grow its economy — carbon emissions will inevitably grow with it. There is also the issue of industrialised nations effectively outsourcing carbon emissions to developing nations such as China. This is a consequence of huge quantities of carbon-intensive manufacturing taking place in China on behalf of buyers in the west. It wants consumer countries to take responsibility for the carbon emissions generated in the manufacture of goods, not the producer countries that export them.
Problems such as these have cast doubts on whether COP15 can succeed. There are also concerns about whether any action we take now to prevent climate change may be too little too late. A Guardian poll revealed almost nine out of 10 climate scientists do not believe political efforts to restrict global warming to an additional 2C — the level the EU defines as "dangerous" — will succeed.
From 7 December environment ministers and officials will meet in Copenhagen for the United Nations climate conference to thrash out a successor to the Kyoto protocol. The conference, held at the modern Bella Center, will run for two weeks. The talks are the latest in an annual series of UN meetings that trace their origins to the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio, which aimed at coordinating international action against climate change.
What does COP15 stand for?
COP15 is the official name of the Copenhagen climate change summit — the 15th Conference of the Parties (COP) under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The COP is the highest body of the UNFCCC and consists of environment ministers who meet once a year to discuss developments in the convention.
Which countries are taking part in the climate change summit, and how many people will be there?
One hundred and ninety-two countries have signed the climate change convention. More than 15,000 officials, advisers, diplomats, campaigners and journalists are expected to attend COP15, joined by heads of state and government.
Who are the main players?
Developing countries, including China and India, believe it is the responsibility of wealthy industrialised nations such as the UK and US to set a clear example on cutting carbon emissions. Significantly, the US rejected the 1997 Kyoto protocol, with George Bush arguing that the 5% reductions required by Kyoto would "wreck [the American] economy" while making no demands on emerging economies. COP15's chances of success have been improved by President Barack Obama's stated intention to achieve an 80% reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.
In April, the secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, acknowledged the role the US had played in past climate emissions at a gathering of officials from the world's 17 largest economies. She said the US was "determined to make up for lost time both at home and abroad". "The US is no longer absent without leave," she said. However, Denmark's minister for climate and energy, Connie Hedegaard, has warned that American leadership on climate change will be undermined if the Obama administration does not pass laws swiftly to reduce carbon pollution.
What does the summit hope to achieve?
Officials will try to agree a new climate treaty as a successor to the Kyoto protocol, the first phase of which expires in 2012. According to Yvo de Boer, executive secretary of the UNFCCC, the four essentials needing an international agreement in Copenhagen are:
1 How much are industrialised countries willing to reduce their emissions of greenhouse gases?
2 How much are major developing countries such as China and India willing to do to limit the growth of their emissions?
3 How is the help needed by developing countries to engage in reducing their emissions and adapting to the impacts of climate change going to be financed?
4 How is that money going to be managed?
What are the sticking points?
The main issue is that of "burden-sharing". Climate scientists say that the world must stop the growth in greenhouse gas emissions and start making them fall from around 2015 to 2020. By 2050 they estimate the world must cut its emissions by 80% compared with 1990 levels to limit global warming to a 2C average rise.
Money is also a major issue. The developing countries know they must hand over hundreds of billions of pounds to poorer nations, to help them adapt to the likely consequences. Earlier this year, Gordon Brown said this climate funding needed to reach $100bn a year by 2020. If the recent recession has made rich countries less willing to part with their cash, this could raise tensions in Copenhagen
But which countries must make the cuts and by how large should they be? For example, the rapidly growing Chinese economy has recently overtaken America as the world's largest emitter of carbon dioxide. Yet America has historically emitted far more emissions than China, and on a per capita basis Chinese emissions are around a quarter of those of the US.
The Chinese government argues that it has a moral right to develop and grow its economy — carbon emissions will inevitably grow with it. There is also the issue of industrialised nations effectively outsourcing carbon emissions to developing nations such as China. This is a consequence of huge quantities of carbon-intensive manufacturing taking place in China on behalf of buyers in the west. It wants consumer countries to take responsibility for the carbon emissions generated in the manufacture of goods, not the producer countries that export them.
Problems such as these have cast doubts on whether COP15 can succeed. There are also concerns about whether any action we take now to prevent climate change may be too little too late. A Guardian poll revealed almost nine out of 10 climate scientists do not believe political efforts to restrict global warming to an additional 2C — the level the EU defines as "dangerous" — will succeed.
the essentials in copenhagen
The essentials in CopenhagenRather than getting every small detail of a new global climate treaty done in Copenhagen, UN climate chief Yvo de Boer hopes the conference will reach agreements on four political essentials.
Michael von Bülow
16/03/2009 10:30
The UN climate conference in Copenhagen in December this year may not yield a new global climate treaty with every minor detail in place. But hopefully it will close with agreements on four political essentials, thereby creating a clarity the world – not least the financially struck business world – needs.
The wish for clarity is expressed by Yvo de Boer, executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), in an interview with Environment & Energy Publishing (E&E). According to Yvo de Boer, the four essentials calling for an international agreement in Copenhagen are:
1. How much are the industrialized countries willing to reduce their emissions of greenhouse gases?
2. How much are major developing countries such as China and India willing to do to limit the growth of their emissions?
3. How is the help needed by developing countries to engage in reducing their emissions and adapting to the impacts of climate change going to be financed?
4. How is that money going to be managed?
“If Copenhagen can deliver on those four points I’d be happy,” says Yvo de Boer.
He sees a need to get something signed and agreed in Copenhagen, but he thinks it will be very difficult to get every final, small detail of a whole new treaty done. The new climate treaty will be replacing the Kyoto Protocol which was adopted in Kyoto, Japan, in December 1997 and entered into force on 16 February 2005.
The Kyoto Protocol which sets binding targets for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions has been signed and ratified by 184 parties of the UN Climate Convention. One notable exception is the United States, and Yvo de Boer is “really happy” to see the US back in the international climate change process and that the US is also engaging domestically in the process.
“My big lesson from the Kyoto era is that it's really important that the government delegation that represents the United States is in close touch with the Senate, with the elected officials on what's acceptable and what's not,” says de Boer, and he adds:
“I think that a major shortcoming of Kyoto was that the official delegation came back with a treaty they knew was never going to make it through the Senate. And this time I have the feeling that the communication is much stronger, that the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, through John Kerry, is really expressing strongly what they feel needs to be done in Copenhagen.”
Yvo de Boer thinks the Kyoto Protocol was rejected by the US for mainly two reasons. Firstly, because it did not involve action on the part of major developing countries. Secondly, because it was felt by the Bush administration that Kyoto would be harmful to the US economy.
Copenhagen will be a whole different scenario, and de Boer feels confident that President Barack Obama can successfully engage China and India and convince them to sign the next treaty.
“I think that Secretary of State Clinton's visit to Beijing was a really important and encouraging step to get us moving on that road,” says Yvo de Boer.
Asked about the global recession, de Boer thinks it will certainly have an impact on the negotiations in Copenhagen.
“You see already that investments in renewable energy projects are going down, partly because of the oil price going down and partly because of the economic activity going down,” he says.
But even though greenhouse gas emissions are expected to slow down as a result of shrinking industrial activities, de Boer does not believe it will lessen the pressure on countries to act and sign a new treaty.
Michael von Bülow
16/03/2009 10:30
The UN climate conference in Copenhagen in December this year may not yield a new global climate treaty with every minor detail in place. But hopefully it will close with agreements on four political essentials, thereby creating a clarity the world – not least the financially struck business world – needs.
The wish for clarity is expressed by Yvo de Boer, executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), in an interview with Environment & Energy Publishing (E&E). According to Yvo de Boer, the four essentials calling for an international agreement in Copenhagen are:
1. How much are the industrialized countries willing to reduce their emissions of greenhouse gases?
2. How much are major developing countries such as China and India willing to do to limit the growth of their emissions?
3. How is the help needed by developing countries to engage in reducing their emissions and adapting to the impacts of climate change going to be financed?
4. How is that money going to be managed?
“If Copenhagen can deliver on those four points I’d be happy,” says Yvo de Boer.
He sees a need to get something signed and agreed in Copenhagen, but he thinks it will be very difficult to get every final, small detail of a whole new treaty done. The new climate treaty will be replacing the Kyoto Protocol which was adopted in Kyoto, Japan, in December 1997 and entered into force on 16 February 2005.
The Kyoto Protocol which sets binding targets for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions has been signed and ratified by 184 parties of the UN Climate Convention. One notable exception is the United States, and Yvo de Boer is “really happy” to see the US back in the international climate change process and that the US is also engaging domestically in the process.
“My big lesson from the Kyoto era is that it's really important that the government delegation that represents the United States is in close touch with the Senate, with the elected officials on what's acceptable and what's not,” says de Boer, and he adds:
“I think that a major shortcoming of Kyoto was that the official delegation came back with a treaty they knew was never going to make it through the Senate. And this time I have the feeling that the communication is much stronger, that the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, through John Kerry, is really expressing strongly what they feel needs to be done in Copenhagen.”
Yvo de Boer thinks the Kyoto Protocol was rejected by the US for mainly two reasons. Firstly, because it did not involve action on the part of major developing countries. Secondly, because it was felt by the Bush administration that Kyoto would be harmful to the US economy.
Copenhagen will be a whole different scenario, and de Boer feels confident that President Barack Obama can successfully engage China and India and convince them to sign the next treaty.
“I think that Secretary of State Clinton's visit to Beijing was a really important and encouraging step to get us moving on that road,” says Yvo de Boer.
Asked about the global recession, de Boer thinks it will certainly have an impact on the negotiations in Copenhagen.
“You see already that investments in renewable energy projects are going down, partly because of the oil price going down and partly because of the economic activity going down,” he says.
But even though greenhouse gas emissions are expected to slow down as a result of shrinking industrial activities, de Boer does not believe it will lessen the pressure on countries to act and sign a new treaty.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)