Category: Previous Issues Articles

Roaming in the halls of the QNCC, it’s not hard to hear the frustration from poorer countries lamenting the lack of climate finance. The only thing louder is the excuses from the richer ones, saying the money is nowhere to be found.

Well, ECO has a solution! A new analysis from Oil Change International shows that rich countries are spending more than 5 times as much on subsidizing fossil fuel companies than their climate finance pledges.

Just a quick perusal of the figures provides some shocking details. Australia, for instance, has subsidized fossil fuels at a rate of 40 times more than their climate finance pledge. The United States? Their climate finance pledge is mere 20% of what they spend subsidizing the richest corporations in the world. That favorite Fossil country, Canada, spends nearly eight times as much subsidizing their beloved fossil fuel industry than they do supporting the most vulnerable.

So, when you hear that there’s no money to be found, now you, dear ECO reader, know exactly where to look! Time to stop subsidizing the industry that is fueling the climate crisis and put that money to use fueling a safe future! (And one place to start would be including fossil fuel subsidy phase out in the pre­2020 mitigation work programme…)

Pre­2020 ambition should first ensure that all ministers clearly understand why it is urgent and important to increase ambition by all parties with adequate support for developing countries. How about starting the roundtable with highlights of the UNEP gigatonne gap and the World Bank 4° C reports?

Next, ministers should propose what they are willing to do.

Here’s a good one: how about moving to the high end of the pledges.

Here’s another one: How about ending fossil fuel subsidies?

While we’re at it: Phase out HFCs?

Are we done yet? Not even close. Time to stop building any more coal power stations.

Come on, everyone can play! Just choose and do it! After all, we’re running out of time!

Speaking of which, and last on ECO’s list: agree a date to agree on further measures.

Side Event

Monday 3rd December

18:30 – 20:00

CLIMATE ACTION AND

ADVOCACY  IN THE SOUTH

Hall 5, Side Event Room 2

ECO is wondering how much more clarity this process needs. Amongst many others, the UNEP and the World Bank have pointed out that while there is still a chance to restrict temperature rise to two degrees centigrade, we are not on track to avoid dangerous climate change. ECO thinks that there is no disagreement about that.

So where are we on next steps to address this issue and agree on essential and urgent mitigation action? Well, the Umbrella group seems to be telling us that there is no need to worry because they are making progress – they have a proposal for a new process! Yes, the Umbrella Group is proposing to clarify the pledges under 1(b)(i) and have suggested a two year programme to do so.

ECO would like to get a couple of points in this proposal clarified. You’re saying you need more time to talk? And that there will be no agreement of common accounting rules here?

Surely a bit of common accounting for 1(b)(i) pledges would allow the mist to clear and help Parties to check comparability of effort? Just set out a carbon budget for 2020. If you think there is no need to compare apples and oranges, you could just check the number!
... Read more ...

In his remarks to the Parties on Wednesday, the Adaptation Fund (AF) chair underscored the great achievement made by the Fund this year. He emphasised, among other things, that the AF has now accredited twelve National Implementing Entities, which allow for direct access of developing countries to the funds of the AF. Experience shows that this has also triggered the strengthening of institutional capacities to manage project funds. For ECO, this is evidence that direct access is no longer a pilot test programme perceived as highly risky, but rather a reality. In addition, two years after its first call for proposals, the AF has approved 25 concrete urgent adaptation projects covering all fields of adaptation, with several more in the pipeline. A key objective is to target the most vulnerable groups.

Because of these significant achievements of the AF and at the same time the scarce resources at its disposal, ECO is seriously worried about the dwindling resources and lack of predictability that poor countries are facing. Due to the over-supply of permits, the lack of mitigation ambition and the global economic downturn, prices for CERs, which provide the main source of income for the AF, have gone down to record lows below US$2.
... Read more ...

Is history repeating itself, or is a strong commitment to gender equality really on the table? During yesterday’s open-ended consultations on SBI agenda 21 (Other matters), the EU introduced a draft decision promoting gender equality in the UN climate negotiation process. The draft text decision, Promoting gender equality by improving the participation of women in UNFCCC negotiations and in the representation of Parties in bodies established pursuant to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change or the Kyoto Protocol is in fact a re-affirmation and strengthening of a decision already taken more than a decade ago. During COP7 in Marrakech, the parties agreed to adopt Decision 36/CP.7, which recognized the importance of gender equality in climate decision making; urged the parties to nominate women to elected UNFCCC positions; and requested the Secretariat to keep information on the gender composition of UNFCCC bodies with elective posts.

Despite this decision, participation of women in UNFCCC bodies and as Party delegates overall has remained disappointingly low. With that in mind, the EU delegation submitted this new decision to remind COP participants of the importance of gender equality. In many ways, the proposed decision is similar to the old one: it recognizes the importance of women’s participation as part of effective and equitable climate policy; requests the Secretariat to keep information on women’s participation in the conferences; and sets a goal of gender balance in all UNFCCC bodies.
... Read more ...

Yesterday ECO asked the question every journalist watching these talks wants answered: will countries in the Arab Gulf commit to change course to a greener future here in Doha? So far just one country has given an answer. Lebanon has said that they are striving to submit a supported NAMA. ECO strives with them.

To most people in the real world outside the climate change negotiations, the acid test for success in Doha is whether the outcome will include any further emissions cuts beyond those pledged three years ago in Copenhagen. That is, any action that will actually help us to tackle our ballooning global greenhouse gas emissions.

But when negotiations on this issue finally began on Friday, delegates talked more about what mitigation actions others must take, rather than what they must do.

At least Lebanon seems to have read the script for this COP. It’s time for other countries, including those in the Arab region, to learn their lines. They should recognise their vulnerability to climate change impacts, announce a pledge and show they are ready to be major players in these talks.

That would be something these talks can be remembered for, even after the circus has left town.
... Read more ...

The First Place Fossil goes to New Zealand and the USA for not wanting to advance common accounting rules here in Doha. CAN was shocked in today’s spin off group on 1b1 when New Zealand had the gall to declare that countries will not agree on common accounting in Doha and thus a pragmatic approach would be to continue talking. Oh New Zealand, if only that approach would work on climate change!! But we all know, as Hurricane Sandy dramatically reminded us, climate change waits for no government. So the pragmatic approach would, in fact, be to finally agree that a tonne is a tonne is a tonne and all must be reduced! The USA has long not moved on this issue and today’s session was no different. But as South Africa helpfully reminded us, it is no longer acceptable to just refer to the system as “rigorous, robust and transparent” but you actually need to agree on the rules to make that happen. Time to get to work!

Canada wins the Second Place Fossil of the Day award. Oh Canada. When will you give fossil a break? You have failed on Kyoto and you are embarrassing on mitigation, but it seems you will not be content until you hit rock bottom on finance too.
... Read more ...

Earlier this year, ECO was delighted to read submission upon submission referencing the potential for removing fossil fuel subsidies to contribute substantially to pre-2020 mitigation ambition. In fact, it was so exciting that we counted the countries represented by these submissions. Turns out, over 110 countries supported submissions calling on fossil fuel subsidy reform to be included as an option for raising mitigation ambition.

Well, Thursday morning it seemed as though many parties had forgotten about these submissions, only a few months after they were sent in. Despite hours of discussion, fossil fuel subsidies seemed to not have made it into the morning’s ADP workstream 2 discussions.

Fortunately, not all countries have fully forgotten this issue, though, and yesterday afternoon’s ADP session provided some hope. ECO would like to thank the Philippines, Costa Rica and Switzerland for recognizing this important opportunity for additional pollution reductions. (ECO would also note rumours that the US and Mexico referred to fossil fuel subsidy reform in other sessions in recent days as well).

The IEA has told us that removing fossil fuel subsidies could close the mitigation gap by nearly one half between existing pledges and what’s needed by 2020 to put us on a path to limit global warming to 2 degrees.
... Read more ...