Category: Previous Issues Articles

To be Fossil-worthy, you must be cowardly. You must shake with a limp wrist. So yesterday we didn’t give out a Fossil. We gave a Ray of the Day.  

Despite the name, we do not give Rays out every day. It’s only given when extraordinary things happen. Monday night at 6pm, there was a high level meeting of 43 nations from the Climate Vulnerable Forum (CVF). They made a bold, ambitious declaration to do something amazing. The CVF declared that they support a Paris Agreement that aims to achieve full decarbonisation of our economies, so they can run their countries on 100% renewable energy by 2050! In doing so, these countries have decided not to play the victim. They are showing the kind of leadership the rest of the world can learn from. They are leading the way in setting course for a safer world with only 1.5°C of global warming. This declaration is so big, so bold, that it makes lots of the other countries look like…fossils.

Let’s hear it for the countries of the Climate Vulnerable Forum!

A permanent Action Agenda building on the lessons of the Lima Paris Action Agenda could narrow the gap between current emissions trajectories and those required to limit global temperature rise to below 1.5°C.   

Some of the elements of such a permanent Action Agenda seem to be falling into place. Nobody disagrees about the importance of closing the gap or of identifying menus of good policy options that could be scaled up or replicated. Nobody disagrees about the benefits of involving non-state actors. There is a growing consensus that we need to appoint two high-level champions to facilitate the development of initiatives that help to close the gap.

However, it gets murkier from there. Though developed countries can and should launch unilateral and cooperative actions with their own resources, developing countries will require additional finance and technological support to take extra action. Yet some parties seem to think that this should not be discussed.

Similarly, it is clear that climate change impacts are increasing and that we need to develop additional initiatives to scale up adaptation actions. Yet, the fate of a Technical Examination Process for adaptation is still hotly debated, and here too some Parties do not want to discuss ways to increase support for adaptation.
... Read more ...

Yesterday’s Joint Contact Group on the 2013-2015 review saw Saudi Arabia–supported by its shadows Oman and China, attempt to block clear conclusions from ADP and COP’s two years of excellent work on the long-term goal. Worse, those countries are trying to prevent progress towards a COP decision on strengthening the limit for acceptable warming, which has its foundations in the robust climate science contained in the Structured Expert Dialogue (SED).

The SED found that the previously accepted ‘guardrail’ opinion, that 2°C of warming is safe, is inadequate. Now we know that the line of defence must be set lower. Yesterday, many countries–including the members of the Climate Vulnerables Forum–echoed that concept in an impressive declaration, calling for a warming limit of 1.5°C.

2°C of warming would result in catastrophic impacts on sensitive global ecosystems. Arctic sea-ice will disappear, glaciers will melt, and ocean acidification will destroy coral reef ecosystems. In other words: disaster for the climate and disaster for our planet.

The good news is the SED concluded that keeping warming well below 2°C is still possible through deep emission cuts. These cuts can be achieved through full decarbonisation of energy systems, along with scaling-up of low-carbon energy technologies by approximately 90% by 2050.
... Read more ...

This is also sometimes the case when looking at the many pieces that will make up the Paris package. For example, most people see the Lima Paris Action Agenda (LPAA) as a forum to bring together state and non-state actors to accelerate cooperative climate action.

Yet, from another perspective, the LPAA could also be seen as something else–the first test for a more permanent high-level action agenda that Paris should establish. A permanent high-level engagement platform would be a key element of a strong Workstream 2 decision. As proposed by AOSIS, this action agenda would be led by two high-level champions, who are prominent global individuals with the stature and connections to rally the world to close the emissions gap to 1.5°C.

Given the important example the LPAA would set, it needs to get off on the right foot.
... Read more ...

One message that transpired from Monday’s leaders’ event was that developed countries claim to have a lot of solidarity with vulnerable countries. Good. ECO assumes they are now planning to turn warm words into action–and answer Africa’s call to double the share of adaptation finance in overall climate finance, from today’s 16% to 32% by 2020, a call first heard at the pre-COP a few weeks ago.

This would lead to US$32 billion a year by 2020 for adaptation, within the $100 billion promise, so (good news) no new money would have to be found. Rather, such a target would be a qualification of the $100 billion promise, and likely find support among vulnerable countries from all continents and contribute to the building of an alliance of ambition here in Paris.

However, when ECO spoke to developed countries about this, some offered rather lame excuses (so much for solidarity). One negotiator said setting such a target was too prescriptive–as if developing countries haven’t been asking for increased adaptation finance for ages. Another tried to dodge the challenge, claiming there are not enough adaptation projects in the pipeline, although admitted that if poor countries would be provided with readiness and capacity building support, that pipeline would get clogged in no time, and demand for finance would skyrocket.
... Read more ...