[Hooray we have a new Article 6 text, and it’s the feast of the [brackets][options] again. It’s [nearly] all there: from the most ambitious to the [ridiculous][scary].
ECO‘s jaw dropped in happy amazement when a search for the words “Human Rights” and “Rights of Indigenous Peoples” didn’t come up blank, but reality hit again when noticing all the brackets as well as their absence from activity design and the continuing failure to have an independent grievance mechanism. Remember, [Human Rights][rights language] should never have left this text in the first place.
It’s also getting a bit tiring to remind Parties that the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement are not one and the same, and that there’s no [place][role][possibility] for CERs to be carried over. No CERs can count towards a country’s first [or subsequent] NDC[s], even if [vintage][registration] cut-offs are put in place.
Parties should stop counting brackets and start [ac]counting [for] emission reductions. Yes, we see all those [loopholes][jokes (we wish)][nonsensical propositions] in the text. Every credit must be accounted for, and that means applying corresponding adjustments for all credits, no [exception][excuses][”please look the other way while I fudge my emissions report”].
ECO urges Parties not to play games with baselines. Baselines could [strongly undermine integrity][weaken the Paris Agreement] if they are set at business as usual levels. Host countries should not choose their own rules, and updates over time are crucial.
There are also brackets we are happy to see. This includes those signaling the continued support by some Parties for a high share of proceeds for adaptation, and a high cancellation rate to deliver an Overall Mitigation of Global Emissions. We see [5%] [20%] [30%]… and we encourage Parties to take the brackets off of the highest numbers, while avoiding any significant adverse effects.
Finally, ECO noticed that the 6.8 text was a bit more [robust][substantial], but it wasn’t all good as some [extremely risky][unproven] “concepts” such as carbon capture and storage, which shouldn’t be a priority action, have crept into the text.
May ECO also remind you that for Glasgow to keep 1.5°C alive, you shouldn’t agree to any Article 6 rules that open up [loopholes][free passes][get out of jail free cards] that [delay real action][make our task to stay below 1.5°C [even harder][impossible].]
So we’ll make it clear and simple for you. Parties, in fully unbracketed text: do not carry-over any old CERs, do not allow any transition period for proper accounting, and do not ignore Human Rights and the rights of Indigenous Peoples.