ECO Newsletter

Sitting in Monday’s briefing for observer organisations, ECO was delighted to hear the incoming President identify progress on climate finance as a “clear priority” for COP19.

We couldn’t agree more! With the Fast Start period behind us and only a handful of countries with new money on the table, we’re in need of some giant strides between now and the end of Warsaw.

At a minimum, all developed countries must set out, in a way that ensures comparability, the climate finance they will provide over the period 2013-2015, that is comparable and commit to a roadmap for scaling up public finance and reaching US$100bn per year by 2020. The Green Climate Fund must not be left an empty shell – for a fourth COP in a row. And if we’re to confront the enduring “adaptation gap”, Parties should agree that at least 50% of all public climate finance between now and 2020 will be spent on adaptation.

So Poland, now is the time for a good hard think about what it will take to deliver this kind of progress by November. ECO’s advice: It’s time to bring in those who hold the purse strings. That’s right, we’re talking finance ministers. If you’re serious about some big decisions on finance, which ECO believes you are, then we need to involve Finance Ministries and Treasuries in the conversation as soon as possible.
... Read more ...

Poland is an extraordinary country. It has overcome many years of oppression and poverty to transform itself into a significant economic powerhouse and a proactive European player on diplomacy.

But it appears the Polish government is willing to risk their status as rising international star, and allow its politics to be captured by high carbon incumbents.

If the Polish government continues to pursue this position, it is quite likely that the EU will lose patience, and a diplomatic backlash is quite possible. This will result in Poland losing its say to shape the future of Europe’s energy regime, widening the gap between its ageing and inefficient energy infrastructure and a more dynamic, smarter and innovative power system across other EU countries.

ECO wonders if the Polish government is kicking itself in deciding to put their names forward for the Presidency of COP19 later on this year. Warsaw will not be a Poznan. Back in 2008, the Poles were still only agitators as opposed to today’s outright blockers of the EU’s energy and climate ambitions. Poznan was a low-key COP, unlike Warsaw, which should agree on the outlines of an Equity Reference Framework for the post-2020 deal; outline further efforts on public finance (with the engagement of Finance Ministers); close the pre-2020 mitigation gap; affirm the political significance of the Loss and Damage debate and set in place a series of processes to deliver a 2015 agreement.
... Read more ...

Hello ECO readers. Just because the SBI won’t start this Bonn session (seriously Russia!!) it does not mean that ECO could conclude the fortnight without at least one piece of acerbic commentary from me, Ludwig (and my gender-balancing friend, Ludwiga). And do not be disappointed, we’ve got a good one for you!

In Tuesday’s ADP informal, a big country down-under came up with a great idea to deal with adaptation financing – “let’s just ignore the costs and focus on the opportunities!”
The text at that time had (and we hope still has) a request for the Secretariat to prepare a technical paper on the costs of adaptation at various temperature levels. It seems these mates had so much fun making up new colours for their temperature maps during the extended heat wave in their summer that now they want everyone to benefit from such “adaptation opportunities”!

With less than 5 months until COP19, there is much homework for Parties to do on specific proposals for the nature and structure of the 2015 deal. By Warsaw, Parties need to broadly be able to answer the 5 Ws (who, what, where, when, why and how) for all elements of the deal. Take mitigation for example.

Who – well that’s easy – all Parties.

What – binding mitigation commitments that respect Parties’ common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities in a dynamic manner, and long term global temperature and reduction targets that provide a strong signal to the investment community that fossil fuels are done!

Where – in a Protocol.

When – for the 5 year commitment period of 2021-2025.

Why – to save your gluteus maximus (and the planet).

How – ECO really hopes the answer to this question is obvious considering how much airtime Parties have been giving to CAN’s Equity Reference Framework these past two weeks.

Hummm…upon reflection, perhaps the homework is not that challenging, as all that is needed is to flesh out the “what” to be committed. This should ensure that Parties have enough clarity on the nature of commitments to be able to table initial offers by the Ban-Ki Moon Summit in the autumn of 2014.
... Read more ...

ECO is anxiously awaiting New Zealand’s expected pledge by Warsaw. With that in mind, it seemed timely to revisit an article from last year’s « CAN Collectibles » series on countries that can increase their ambition:

Countries That Can Increase Their Ambition

New Zealand 

National term of endearment/greeting: Bro/Mate

Annual alcohol consumption: 9.6 litres per person per year

Annual cheese consumption: 5.7 kilograms per person per year

Best things about New Zealand: Beautiful environment – some of it still unspoiled. Maori Culture. Wine

Worst things about New Zealand: Wanting to be Australia. Addiction to cars. Pathological need to spoil the unspoiled bits

Things you didn’t know: New Zealand isn’t all clean and green. New Zealand is the first country in the world to catalogue its entire known living and fossil life from 530 million years ago to today

Existing Unconditional pledge on the table: It’s all conditional, which means the unconditional pledge is to do nothing

Existing Conditional pledge (upper end): 10-20% reduction in net emissions below 1990 gross emissions levels by 2020

Next step to increase ambition by COP18: This year: Submit a meaningful QELRO that would require a 40% reduction by 2020, produce a low carbon development plan, tell us when gross emissions will peak, listen to the voices of progressive business leaders and agricultural scientists who can help us get there rather than the usual head-in-the-sand lobby groups, and get a new attitude

Rationale: Untapped low cost abatement opportunities.
... Read more ...

As the road to the 2015 agreement is beginning to be paved brick by brick, ECO wants to help Parties by giving them a direction in which this road should be built. Parties will be making submissions around how to further develop and operationalise the ADP work program. Here are a few questions that Parties should address in their submissions, which will help us to get closer to a fair, ambitious and binding deal.

Equity

• How could the principles of the Convention be operationalised into objective criteria and indicators to guide countries in seeking to identify their fair and adequate contributions to the globally needed mitigation effort and adaptation support and provision of the means of implementation?
• What could be the suitable timelines up to 2015 to a) identify objective ex-ante criteria to develop an agreed list of indicators for identifying each country’s fair efforts, b) for countries to submit initial mitigation and finance commitments and c) assess and revise commitments based on the ex-ante agreed list of indicators?

Mitigation

• What should be the global carbon budget and subsequent long term emission pathways indicative of emission levels at 2025, 2030 and 2050?
• What information should Parties include about their targets and commitments in order to allow individual and aggregate assessment against adequacy and equity, including their views about a timeline that allows for this assessment and revision of targets well before COP21?

Dear Delegates,

ECO wants to share its famous recipe for a delicious and ambitious omelet. We hope it will inspire you in cooking your submissions about strategies and approaches. Bear in mind that it takes up to 82 days to cook. ECO is looking forward to the September 2nd Green Climate Fund Board meeting to enjoy it!
Step 1: Crack 60 billion eggs of public finance for 2013 to 2015. Please make sure your eggs are comparable in size and shape. All the eggs should come from free range, public chickens. At least half the eggs should have adaptation yolk.
This is important if you want your omelet to be fair and balanced and nutritious.

Step 2: Whisk in some new and additional cups of milk (Please use FTT-branded milk). Add organic and fair-trade bunker-grown onions.

Step 3: Spice up your omelet with 5 tablespoons of MRV and grated cheese to make it more savoury and transparent.

Step 4: Grab your whisk and whisk like crazy; you should work up a sweat at this point.

Step 5: Fry your omelet in a high-level Ministerial pan if you really mean to deliver a tasty and trustworthy omelet.

Serves 132 guests from developing nations.
... Read more ...

ECO was pleased to wake up Sunday to the news that Presidents Obama and Xi had agreed to work together to combat climate change by phasing down the super greenhouse gases, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), under the Montreal Protocol. An agreement under Montreal could prevent emissions of 100 billion tonnes CO2e by 2050.

First that great party on Saturday, and then this?! For a while now, the EU has been busy pushing a COP decision at Warsaw that will urge Parties to begin this exact same process under the Montreal Protocol, and they are clearly excited to have China and the US in agreement. As Connie Hedegaard tweeted Saturday, “Welcome on board!”

All eyes are now on the next intersessional meeting of the Montreal Protocol happening in a few weeks, hoping it will turn this political arrangement into concrete, short-term action, which must not stop at phasing down, but start phasing out with appropriate finance and technology support to developing countries. HFCs are human-manufactured chemicals, primarily used in refrigeration, air conditioning and foam blowing, which were commercialised to replace the high-Global Warming Potential, ozone depleting, human manufactured chemicals phased out by the Montreal Protocol over the past 25 years.

Yet, HFCs are also extremely harmful to the climate, with global warming potentials much higher than carbon dioxide.
... Read more ...