|
Get AfricaFocus Bulletin by e-mail!
on your Newsreader!
Format for print or mobile
Africa: Little Momentum in Climate Talks
AfricaFocus Bulletin
Jul 14, 2011 (110714)
(Reposted from sources cited below)
Editor's Note
"We agreed in Bali in December 2007 to build a much
stronger international climate regime to better cope with
recent alarming analysis of the disastrous effects of
climate change. But instead of achieving this new regime,
we now see quite unbelievably an attempt to dismantle even
the weaker regime that we now have. Instead of a legally
binding system to lock in adequate emissions cuts to 2020
for developed countries ...there is now the most likely
prospect of a 'voluntary pledge' system in which developed
countries merely state what they can do" -- Martin Khor,
South Centre
Khor goes on to note that there is still some hope for
progress at the climate conference in Durban this year,
including formation of a new Green Climate Fund, and at
least continuation of the current Kyoto Protocol
commitments by a minimum number of developed countries.
But in fact, he notes, it is the developing countries which
are now making the greatest commitments to act to slow
climate change, even though the developed countries are
those who bear the greatest responsibility.
This AfricaFocus Bulletin contains (1) this summary
analysis by Martin Khor of the state of the talks, (2) a
report by the South Centre on a conference in Beijing on
low-carbon growth initiatives, and (3) a note from Oxfam on
the new study they have commissioned analyzing the pledges
by developed and developing countries.
Another AfricaFocus Bulletin, sent out by e-mail today and available
on the web at
http://www.africafocus.org/docs11/ren1107.php, reports
on rising levels of investment in renewable energy, particularly
in developing countries, despite the lack of progress in
global climate talks.
Two additional sources on the critical issues connected to
the proposed Green Climate Fund are the following:
Official Background on Green Climate Fund negotiations
http://unfccc.int / Direct URL: http://tinyurl.com/63wq4u4
Civil Society Recommendations on Green Climate Fund
http://www.boell.org/web/140-749.html
For previous AfricaFocus Bulletins on environment and
climate issues, see http://www.africafocus.org/envexp.php
++++++++++++++++++++++end editor's note+++++++++++++++++
The global climate regime on the brink
South Bulletin 55, July 11, 2011
By Martin Khor
South Centre
http://www.southcentre.org
[Below is the Note distributed at the South Centre press
conference during the UNFCCC session in Bonn, held on 16
June 2011. It explains why the global climate regime is at
the crossroads and can either unravel altogether or still
evolve into a new fair deal.]
We agreed in Bali in December 2007 to build a much stronger
international climate regime to better cope with recent
alarming analysis of the disastrous effects of climate
change. But instead of achieving this new regime, we now
see quite unbelievably an attempt to dismantle even the
weaker regime that we now have. Instead of a legally
binding system to lock in adequate emissions cuts to 2020
for developed countries collectively and individually --
which is what was agreed to -- there is now the most likely
prospect of a "voluntary pledge" system in which developed
countries merely state what they can do, without a formal
system of assessing the adequacy of each country's target
or the adequacy of the collective effort. This will itself
be a disincentive for developing countries, when they see
those who are supposed to lead the process, falter instead.
Disastrous Projection of Pledges
Top climate scientists in a UN Environment Programme report
show how disastrously off-mark such a voluntary system can
be. Instead of cutting their emissions by at least 25-40%
below 1990 levels in 2020 as required (or by more than 40%,
as demanded by developing countries), the developed
countries will actually increase their emission by 6% in a
bad scenario (based on the lower end of pledges and the use
of loopholes) or will only cut by 16% in the good scenario
(based on the upper end of pledges and without the use of
loopholes). The calculations are based on the pledges the
developed countries made under the Copenhagen Accord.
These pledges, together with the figures from announcements
made by some developing countries, show that the world is
moving in the direction of a global temperature increase of
between 2.5 to 5 degrees Celsius before the end of this
century, according to the UNEP report. This is far removed
from the 1.5 or 2 degree "safe limit", and is a recipe for
catastrophe. In 2005 the global emissions level is
estimated at 45 Gigatonnes (i.e. 45 billion tonnes) of CO2
equivalent and in 2009 it is estimated at 48 Gton. With
business as usual, this will rise to 56 Gton in 2020, which
is on the road to disaster. The scientists in the UNEP
study agree that emissions have to be limited to 44 GtCO2e
by 2020 to stay on a 2 degree limitation course. Based on
the Copenhagen Accord pledges, the emissions in 2020 could
be 49 Gton under a good scenario, but as high as 53 Gton
(almost like business-as-usual) in the bad scenario.
Developing Countries Doing Their Share
It is evident that all groups of countries have to
contribute to improving this disastrous situation.
However the Annex I countries are obliged to take the lead,
and show the way. But their pledges so far are deficient,
as a group. And the intended downgrading of the regulated
system to a deregulated system goes in the wrong direction.
An Oxfam press release last week on their newly
commissioned paper says that industrialized countries which
are most responsible for the climate crisis are not pulling
their weight.
"Their competitors in developing countries âfrom China to
India and Brazil â have pledged to do more to rein in
emissions and start building prosperous low carbon
economies. Europe and the US risk being left behind."
New figures from the forthcoming Stockholm Environment
Institute overview of the pledges show that:
- China's total emissions reductions could be nearly
double those of the US by 2020.
- The emissions reductions of developing countries could
be three times greater than those of the EU by 2020.
- The emission reductions of China, India, South Africa
and Brazilâ the BASIC countries â could be slightly greater
than the combined efforts of the 7 biggest developed
countries â the US, Europe, Japan, Canada, Australia, New
Zealand and Russia by 2020.
There should thus not be an excuse not to enter a Kyoto 2nd
period on the ground that major developing countries are
not doing their fair share.
Still Hope For Durban If ...
There is still hope for Durban, however, if enough
developed countries decide they will stay with the Kyoto
Protocol (KP) and fulfill its second commitment period
starting 2013. And that those who stay out of Kyoto will
make a comparable effort, inside the Convention (AWG-LCA).
Developing countries for the first time are making targets,
and those of the largest countries have been credible.
There is little time left to salvage a credible global
climate change regime as Durban is the last chance to
continue with the Kyoto Protocol without a gap (the first
period ends in 2012).
We also hope that there will be sufficient progress on
finance and technology, especially with the firm
establishment in Durban of the Green Climate Fund, the
Technology Mechanism and an Adaptation Committee - three
new institutions that are essential to assist developing
countries. The negotiations on the Fund and the Technology
Mechanism are so far progressing, but a spurt is needed to
get final results in Durban. There cannot be a
postponement on these, nor the placing of conditions that
these will be established only if some developed countries
get what they want out of developing countries in other
areas.
NOTE: The overall understanding on mitigation reached in
Bali: (1) that the Annex I Parties in KP would take on
adequate 2nd period commitments on aggregate and individual
reduction targets consistent with what science requires;
(2) that the US would make its own comparable commitment in
the Convention, in accordance with Para.1b(i); and (3)
developing countries would undertake enhanced mitigation
actions with financial and technological support, both of
which would be measurable, reportable and verifiable (MRV).
This three-piece Bali understanding is now unraveling with
alarming speed. The KP is in mortal danger, as most of its
Annex I Members show clear signs of abandoning ship. The
new vehicle they are looking to join is vastly inferior. It
is the voluntary pledge system that the US had been
advocating, in which individual developed countries state
how much reduction they would like to set as their target.
In the system, there is no aggregate target to be set in
accordance with what the science says is required. There is
no formal mechanism to review the commitments (individual
and aggregate) and to get Parties to revise them so that
they meet adequate levels. The mild discipline is that
there will be a periodic review on whether the Parties meet
their pledged targets, but not a review as to whether the
pledges are adequate.
Towards green low-carbon growth?
South Bulletin 55, July 11, 2011
A conference, held on 22-24 June 2011 in Beijing, heard
plans by China and other countries for achieving green lowcarbon
development to combat climate change. Despite an
upbeat mood, the difficulties are many and serious.
Despite the slow progress in the global climate
negotiations, some developing countries are already taking
their own climate actions to reduce emissions and adapt to
the effects of climate change.
Of course, their actions will fall far short of what is
required, unless the funds and technology expected as a
result from the global talks materialize and unless the
developed countries also cut their emissions greatly and
leave more "carbon space" to the developing countries.
The Chinese government organized a conference on "green
low-carbon development" in Beijing on 22-24 June, bringing
together international and local experts with national and
provincial policy makers.
That China hosted this event itself was significant, as it
is the largest developing country in both population and
economic size. It has also become one of the two largest
Greenhouse Gas emitting countries in the world.
But as pointed out at the conference, China is still a
middle-income developing country, ranked rather average
among developing countries in both per capita income and
per capita emissions.
Nevertheless, the spotlight has very much been on China,
not least because its high economic growth on top of its
economic weight means that what happens in the country has
a significant impact on global climate change.
The conference was meant to open China's plans for scrutiny
and comments. The list of actions being planned is
impressive. As enumerated by Ms. Sun Cui Hua, Deputy
Director-General of the Climate Change Department of the
National Development and Reform Commission, these included
ten policy areas.
The first was implementing climate change macro policies.
The targets in the recently unveiled 12th Five-Year Plan
(2011-15) include:
- Non-fossil fuel to account for 11.4 per cent of primary
energy consumption;
- Cut by 30% of water consumption per unit of value-added
industrial output;
- 16% reduction in energy consumption per unit of GDP;
- 17% cut in Carbon dioxide emission per unit of GDP (en
route to the pledged goal of 40-45% reduction by 2020
compared to 2005);
- Forest coverage rate to rise to 21.66 per cent and forest
stock to increase by 600 million cubic meters.
Not mentioned by Ms. Sun, but which will have equally
important implications is the new 7% average annual GDP
growth target for the 2011-15 period. This is a reduction
from the annual growth of 10-plus percent per year that
China has been used to.
A cut by 3 to 4 percentage points in GDP growth will in
itself mean a large reduction in emissions growth, on top
of the cuts in emissions intensity of GDP.
Other policies or actions announced by Ms. Sun included:
- Establishing a fund in China to finance its climate
actions.
- Launching low-carbon pilot projects in selected cities
and provinces.
- Using market mechanisms including new conditions for
enterprises, and a pilot programme on emissions trading.
- A low carbon certification system to identify industries
and products and encourage upgrading of enterprises.
- Compiling an inventory of greenhouse gases, including
building the capacity of local governments and having a
guidebook for enterprises.
- Strengthening legislation to accompany the policy
measures
- Education and campaigns for low-carbon lifestyles.
- Strengthening international cooperation through exchanges
and South-South cooperation.
- Enacting policy measures in various sectors and
improving forecasting and early warning for extreme weather
events.
Italy's Environment Ministry Director General Corrado Clini
said other countries should learn from China in
prioritizing low-carbon technologies. China had become the
leader in investments for low-carbon technologies, spending
US$34 billion in 2010 compared to USA ($17 bil), UK ($12
bil), Spain ($11 bil), Brazil ($8 bil), Germany ($4 bil)
and Canada and India ($3 bil).
Data on recent performance in China's energy and emissions
were given by Wang Zhongmin of the China Institute of
Standardization, who said that energy consumption per unit
of GDP fell by a total of 19% in the 11th Five-Year Plan
period (2006-11). Energy use per unit of copper smelting
dropped 36% and per ton of cement by 29%, while backward
enterprises and technologies had been closed down.
During the period, the energy conserved was more than 600
million tons of standard coal, which meant there was an
accumulated reduction of carbon dioxide by over 1.5 billion
tons.
Europe's climate policy was presented by Jurgen Lefevere of
the European Commission who said that the EU countries had
decoupled emissions from GDP growth, as domestic emissions
had fallen 16% while GDP grew 40% between 1990 and 2009.
He reiterated the EU target of 20 to 30 per cent emissions
reduction by 2020 (compared to 1990) with a reduction of
80-95% by 2050 through a road map that includes emission
reduction plans for various sectors, the use of key
technologies and investments.
The EC had identified additional investments (needed for
climate change actions) of Euro 270 bil a year in
2010-2050. This would be more than offset by benefits,
including fuel-saving of Euro 175-320 bil a year; halving
of imports by 2050, reducing the bill in that year by Euro
400 bil; and health benefits of Euro 88 bil a year in 2050,
and 1.5 million net jobs created in 2020.
Despite the positive domestic plans by China and the
message from Europe that decoupling growth and emissions is
possible, experts also highlighted the huge challenges
facing developing countries in reducing their emissions
growth while maintaining their ambition of high economic
growth.
Some developed countries had not even got their
"decoupling" act together yet, as their emissions have
continued to climb.
For developing countries, who also have to battle not only
poverty but the increased effects of climate change (such
as floods, drought and hurricanes), moving into action to
cut emissions will be difficult. This is where the global
climate negotiations come in.
They have to deliver huge emission cuts in developed
countries and provide sufficient funds and technologies to
developing countries so that they have the atmospheric
space and the resources to do their own decoupling of
emissions from economic development.
Developing countries pledge bigger climate emissions cuts
than world's richest nations
6 June 2011
http://www.oxfam.org / Direct URL:
http://tinyurl.com/6yk6azh
"All countries need to do their fair share to tackle
climate change. Yet rich industrialized countries which are
most responsible for the climate crisis are not pulling
their weight."
Tim Gore
Policy Advisor for Oxfam
A new study for Oxfam reveals that developing countries are
pledging to cut their emissions of greenhouse gases by more
than developed countries. Oxfam estimates that over 60 per
cent of emissions cuts by 2020 are likely to be made by
developing countries.
From Monday delegates from 195 countries are gathering in
Bonn, Germany to resume negotiations on a global deal to
tackle climate change. At last December's climate
conference in Cancun, countries recorded their pledges to
cut emissions of greenhouse gases, but making comparisons
between them has proved difficult because every country
calculates and records their pledges in different ways.
The new analysis by the Stockholm Environment Institute
(SEI), commissioned as part of Oxfam's new global GROW
campaign, compares four of the most widely respected
studies of these pledges. All the studies show that
developing countries have pledged to make bigger cuts in
their greenhouse gas emissions than industrialized
countries, compared to a business as usual scenario.
Tim Gore, Oxfam's climate change policy advisor said: "All
countries need to do their fair share to tackle climate
change. Yet rich industrialized countries which are most
responsible for the climate crisis are not pulling their
weight.
"It's time for governments from Europe to the US to stand
up to the fossil fuel lobbyists. Their competitors in
developing countries â from China to India and Brazil â
have pledged to do more to rein in emissions and start
building prosperous low carbon economies. Europe and the US
risk being left behind."
New figures from the forthcoming SEI overview of the
pledges show that:
- China's total emissions reductions could be nearly double
those of the US by 2020
- The emissions reductions of developing countries could be
three times greater than those of the EU by 2020.
- The emission reductions of China, India, South Africa and
Brazil â the BASIC countries â could be slightly greater
than the combined efforts of the 7 biggest developed
countries â the US, Europe, Japan, Canada, Australia, New
Zealand and Russia by 2020.
Oxfam's analysis also shows that the total emissions cuts
pledged by all countries are not sufficient to prevent
global temperatures rising above the 2 degrees target
agreed by governments in Cancun. Global temperature
increases of more than 1.5 degrees will have catastrophic
consequences for societies across the globe.
Gore said; "In the end, cutting emissions isn't about who
does the most, but whether the total efforts are enough to
avoid devastating levels of global warming â we will either
sink or swim together. The pledges currently on the table
mean we are sinking."
The new analysis of efforts on emissions cuts comes days
after Oxfam published a report "Growing a Better Future"
which forecasts that average prices of staple foods such as
maize will increase by between 120 and 180 per cent by
2030. Up to half of this increase will be driven by climate
change.
Gore said: "We need bolder action to cut emissions and stop
climate change driving generations of children into hunger.
All countries must step up and deliver their fair share of
the emissions reductions needed. Countries must also ensure
the most vulnerable get the support they need to adapt.
Rocketing food prices signal climate change red alert".
Oxfam is calling for action on climate change as part of a
new global GROW campaign to ensure everyone always has
enough to eat.
AfricaFocus Bulletin is an independent electronic
publication providing reposted commentary and analysis on
African issues, with a particular focus on U.S. and
international policies. AfricaFocus Bulletin is edited by
William Minter.
AfricaFocus Bulletin can be reached at africafocus@igc.org.
Please write to this address to subscribe or unsubscribe to
the bulletin, or to suggest material for inclusion. For
more information about reposted material, please contact
directly the original source mentioned. For a full archive
and other resources, see http://www.africafocus.org
|
