Category: Previous Issues Articles

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 ...

While Norway spends millions of dollars on rainforest protection and renewable energy in developing countries, new data shows that Norway is falling short of reaching its domestic targets. The country has been applauded for using its oil tax income to fund REDD+ and CDM projects as well as ODA. However, this is in stark contrast with new numbers from the International Energy Agency (IEA) showing that at home carbon emissions have increased dramatically.

Bård Vegar Solhjell, Norwegian minister of the environment, will arrive in Doha next week to present ambitious targets in the battle against climate change: a 20 percent reduction in domestic greenhouse gas emissions by 2020; a pledge for 500 million dollars annually towards rainforest protection; as well as funds for promoting renewable energy in developing countries; as well as several million for adaptation.

However, the IEA data changes the Norwegian image as an environmental super hero. Norwegian CO2 emissions from fuel combustion have increased by 38 per cent since 1990, more than all other OECD countries except Australia. More worryingly, emission projections toward 2020 show the numbers will only continue to rise. The reason for this increase is that emissions from oil and gas extraction and consumption have risen dramatically.
... Read more ...

New Zealand is topping the Fossil leader board this year and seems determined to stretch its lead. Initially copping an onslaught of condemnation for not re-committing under Kyoto, they are adding insult to injury by continuing to advocate for access to flexible mechanisms for non-legally bound countries, while offering no carrot in return. Their self-centred approach to these negotiations reflects a distinct lack of willingness to participate responsibly.

Increased access to markets is probably a good thing – no one wants to see the CDM collapse entirely – however New Zealand must demonstrate in Doha that it is prepared to pull its weight pre-2020. New Zealand should announce a target of at least 25% below 1990 emissions levels and send a strong signal that they are prepared to make real progress. Yes, these are above the conditional range of your present targets, Minister, but that’s what ambition is. A pledge to significantly scale up finance next year would also serve to restore previously eroded trust, and advance crucial progress on scaling up desperately needed climate funds.

Four fossils in five days give New Zealand a pretty decent hit rate on the fossil ladder. So resigned to inadequacy, the New Zealand Climate Change Minister Tim Groser has started referring to “Fossil” awards as a certainty.
... 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 ...

It was with some optimism that ECO joined the roundtable discussion of the ADP workstream two (“workstream 2 degrees”, as one delegate was heard when entering the room). All Parties had noted the pre-2020 ambition gap with grave concern back in Durban, and after a year of little—if any—progress, Doha seems to be a good moment to get down to work.

However, that’s not quite the way that the US delegate started it. First explaining how failing to adopt domestic climate legislation – which he said would have allowed offsets to do about half of the mitigation job, somehow, constitutes a doubling of ambition – as cuts now need to be done entirely at home. Right…The problem is that while the level of domestic effort will in fact be higher, the atmosphere won’t see a single additional ton of emissions reductions.

ECO rather liked the approach by the Ethiopian delegate who sported the ambition to get the country carbon neutral by 2025 – an undertaking not seen as over-ambitious – if needed support would materialize.

ECO agrees with the developing country delegates who pointed out that there is also lots of ambition work to do outside the ADP: finalising the homework in the KP and the LCA before they close; achieving the highest possible ambition including through getting rid of the hot air for CP2 and beyond; and agreeing common accounting for non-CP2 developed country Parties (the free-riders and ship-jumpers) to ensure comparability of efforts.
... Read more ...

Reading the current text, ECO is concerned that a possible Doha decision may miss the key, overarching points. First, in light of the lack of mitigation ambition, there is cause for grave concern. The low mitigation ambition will determine the level of loss and damage in the future. Second, this results in a high urgency to take action on all fronts of mitigation and adaptation, with the primary objective to reduce loss and damage as much as possible. ECO expects that those who have contributed most to the problem take the responsibility for support. Third, the key reason that vulnerable developing country Parties have put loss and damage on the agenda is the dire situation that the limits of adaptation will likely be surpassed in many regions.

Addressing the impacts where adaptation will no longer be possible is crucial for this discussion. Because of this, the Convention must provide leadership in developing a global strategic response to address loss and damage. Parts of the required actions can be pursued through the existing institutions, such as the Adaptation Committee, the Nairobi Work Programme or the Least Developed Countries Expert Group. These bodies can carry out important activities relevant to addressing loss and damage.
... Read more ...

The LCA is discussing the establishment of a new market mechanism (NMM) and a Framework for Various Approaches (FVA), including the use of markets. But well into the 1st week, it is still unclear what these two work programmes could be about.

There is a common view that the FVA is supposed to give recognition to national emission reduction systems and, if Parties want to, make the emission reductions units that are achieved by these systems internationally tradable and eligible for meeting national emission reduction targets (QELROs). Under the NMM on the other hand, countries could put forward national emission reduction systems to the UNFCCC to be approved for the issuance of credits. Both work streams could end up hosting the same types of emission reduction systems, ranging from market-based instruments to renewable feed-in tariffs. ECO is therefore wondering why bother with two different work streams?!

The answer is clear if one looks at the politics. Although the same types of emission reduction systems could be hosted, the NMM requires international common standards and UNFCCC approval before credits could be issued and used for compliance. The FVA on the other hand could allow countries to develop whatever systems they want and offer the resulting emission credits for compliance without the UNFCCC taking a close look at them, something strongly wished for by Japan, New Zealand and the US.
... Read more ...

While ECO has not yet given up on countries strengthening their national emission reduction targets, there is another simple step that will have a substantial impact. Up to 13 billion tonnes of impact in fact. And ECO knows that the negotiators are well aware of the fact that strong new rules to eliminate the gigantic surplus of emission permits from the Kyoto Protocol’s first commitment period will make a real difference. As our dear readers may have noticed, it’s a subject very dear to ECO’s heart. We have been active in naming and shaming Poland, Ukraine and Russia for fighting for the rights to sell their hot air. We have called out the EU for losing its way on the road to progress and on leadership.

Yet it is not just these countries that are standing in the way of bursting the hot air bubble.

STOP THE PRESSES! It seems that the talks have birthed their latest (non)-negotiating group. Yes, ECO has been hearing rumours that there is a group of Kyoto members, including Australia, Norway and Iceland, forming around a non-position on the carry-over of surplus emissions. It seems they even got a name — if not a position — called the “Fence-Sitters Group.”
... Read more ...

Having COP18 in Qatar presents a unique opportunity to move forward with mitigation and adaptation efforts for climate change in the region, as well as for climate finance. With this in mind, ECO is calling for leadership from the Arab states beyond the conference hall.

ECO supports Greenpeace’s call for east-west regional integration in the Arab world with regard to the research, financing and development of renewable energy technologies. This regional cooperation can build on the work already done by individual states in renewable energy development, while developing a new role for regional states at the forefront of clean energy technology innovation.

Renewable energy cooperation will also promote economies of scale and fraternal ties crucial to dealing with the other pressing climate impacts faced by many regional states: growing water scarcity amid shifting weather patterns and, in some, projected sea-level rises on coastal communities and aquifers.

Climate mitigation requires both regional and global efforts to switch from dirty fossil fuels to safe renewable energy sources.

ECO favours a regional approach in which economic diversification crucial to future prosperity is built on sustainable national and regional energy strategies—where renewable energy progressively takes the lead role in generation. This includes a transformation away from fossil fuel over-reliance.
... Read more ...