CLIMATE NEGOT I AT I O NS C A NC U N, M E X I CO NOV- D EC 2 0 1 0 N G O NE WSLET TER

30
NOVEMBER
ON THE BUS
ISSUE

ECO has been published by Non-Governmental Environmental Groups at major international conferences since the Stockholm Environment
Conference in 1972. ECO is produced co-operatively by the Climate Action Network at the UNFCCC meetings in Cancun in November-December 2010.
ECO email: eco@sunlightdata.com – ECO website: http://climatenetwork.org/eco-newsletters – Editorial/Production: Fred Heutte

CRP.1: Steps toward a Package The Climate

Right-to-Know
Many parties commented in the COP plenary creation of a new fund under the COP, estab-
about this year’s record temperatures and ex- lishment of an effective oversight body, and a As the SBSTA opens today, ECO would like
treme weather events. This comes as ECO process to decide on sources of funding, in- to remind delegates of a crucial item on the
reflects on the Royal Society’s recent treatise cluding innovative sources of public finance. agenda: the proposal for a technical review
on a rapidly warming +4 degree world . . . the The text on Technology unfortunately does of the science relating to long-term tempera-
kind of world resulting from a lack of ambi- not ensure that the technology mechanism ture increases of more than 1.5° C above pre-
tion. The need for dramatic action on mitiga- will be under the authority of and account- industrial levels.
tion has never been so clear. able to the COP. This weakens the objectives What’s this all about? It’s about clarify-
Which brings us to the LCA. ECO wel- of setting up the architecture of cooperation ing what is really at stake here. It’s about ur-
comes the work by the Chair this year. Her through the Technology Executive Com- gently bringing in the latest science to inform
approach to helping parties reach consensus mittee and Technology Network Centres, as the ongoing negotiations, and spelling out the
is to be commended. In a spirit of mutual there is no rules-based multilateral mecha- choice that governments now face – a choice
support, we present the following recommen- nism proposed. It also allows an ad hoc set between raising ambition to a level high
dations on the Chair’s possible elements. of arrangements to emerge that invites promi- enough to avoid climate chaos, or accepting
The Shared Vision must safeguard the nent roles for the World Bank and regional the devastating consequences of a failure to
planet for future generations. Limiting warm- development banks. Just to be clear, they still act in time and at scale.
ing to 1.5° C is necessary to avoid severe fund fossil fuels over conservation, energy This issue was first put on the agenda in
impacts, such as a loss of the Mesoamerican efficiency and renewables. Even US clean Bonn in June. There, AOSIS – alarmed by
Barrier Reef System, a small part of which is energy companies are sceptical of the role of recent reports suggesting that the future of
off the shores of Cancun, the second longest the World Bank. They and others would ben- their nations could be at risk even if global
in the world and a locale for priceless biodi- efit from institutional arrangements that are temperature rise is stabilized at 2° C – pro-
versity. Parties must aim for a 1.5° C tem- clearly under the COP’s guidance. posed that the Secretariat produce a summary
perature threshold, commit to a process that CRP.1 as drafted effectively sidetracks of recent scientific studies.
examines this objective, and agree a global CAN’s proposed building blocks for Capac- During the negotiations in Bonn it was clar-
peak in emissions no later than 2015. Mere ity Building. The text drops the proposed CB ified that this task lies well within the man-
preparation of a review in 2015, as currently Technical Panel, which should be the front date and capabilities of the Secretariat, and
proposed, would not be a call to action but a end of a design-and-build programme for that this by no means would be duplicating
homily to squander a once-only opportunity. new, real and integrated CB to start happen- the work of the IPCC. With these common
The Finance section of the Chair’s note is ing in real places, in real time, backed by real understandings in place, the vast majority of
useful in streamlining the text and identify- and new resources. Without the front end the governments supported the proposal from the
ing potential middle ground in some areas. It entire pathway essentially vanishes. Addi- small island states.
is also missing some crucial elements, such tionally, the text drops a proposed legal lock In the end, however, a few governments
as a proper balance between mitigation and creating an obligation on developed countries still resisted the idea of an overview of re-
adaptation finance, participation of vulner- to adequately support new CB. cent science. One even went so far as to sug-
able populations, civil society and women. The establishment of a strong Adaptation gest that vulnerable countries who wanted to
And yet it is a very promising basis to build Framework for Implementation is essen- know more about the impacts they are facing
on. With additional refinement, it can provide
a way forward to a substantive decision on – CRP.1, continued on page 2 – Right-to-Know, continued on page 2

ISSUE NO 2 VOLUME CXXVII FREE OF CHARGE

 CLIMATE NEGOT I AT I O NS C A NC U N, M E X I CO N OV- D EC 2 0 1 0 NG O NE WSLET TER

– CRP.1, continued from page 1 for offsets with the current inadequately low – Right-to-Know, continued from page 1
tial and within reach. While not perfect, the pledges by developed countries. from climate change could just use Google.
Chair’s text lays out steps for a post-NAPA The MRV text remains a blank canvas. A Cancun must not be the COP where gov-
process for developing country parties and mere 36 words are dedicated to an issue that ernments decide to stick their heads in the
for loss and damage. The text also demands has blocked progress in these negotiations. sand and ignore the latest science relating to
a decision on an Adaptation Committee but Robust MRV is crucial for environmental in- the consequences of the path they are now
remains weak on linking the provision of fi- tegrity, but it must be equitable. Critical is- taking.
nance to adaptation actions, a necessary con- sues such as common accounting standards Furthermore, governments must remember
nection. ECO is most pleased that references for Annex 1 countries, modalities for MRV that while some countries are confronting im-
to response measures have been removed of support in national communications, and minent threats to their very existence, every
from the text. a differentiated approach for verification of last one faces severe climate risk. AOSIS and
Ironically, while Mitigation is arguably the voluntary/unsupported actions taken by de- the rest of the world’s most vulnerable coun-
most important element of a climate agree- veloping countries must be tackled in these tries are standing at the front of the line, but
ment, progress has seemed beyond reach. negotiations. Let’s not forget that transpar- the rest of the world is right behind.
While the Chair’s text delivers only a very ency should apply to the MRV process as Clarifying the scientific realities about cli-
general and concise outline of the expected well, assuring public access and participation mate change must not be an issue just for
outcome, agreement on specific elements of throughout, and developing countries must AOSIS to push. Dear governments – speak
mitigation is an essential part of the outcome be supported in their efforts to build domestic no evil – don’t block a technical review to
from Cancun. Elements could include the MRV capacity. clarify the impacts facing us all if we exceed
creation of a mitigation registry to track ac- Finally, the text is silent on the ultimate a long-term temperature rise of 1.5° C. Soon-
tion and provide support, recognition of the Legal Form of the LCA outcome. Parties er or later all countries are highly vulnerable,
Gigatonne Gap that exists between targets are going to have to come to terms with this and we all have a right to know.
and the level of action required, a process for question soon, since it is inextricably tied
addressing the gap, and preparation of zero to progressing a second commitment period
and low carbon action plans. under the KP. Moreover, the text is silent on Fossils of the Day
Given the complexity of issues related to what mandate the LCA will have going for-
Mechanisms (both market-based and non- ward. A clear sense of how both the AWG-KP #1 - Canada
market-based), the Chair’s suggestion to es- and AWG-LCA will proceed after Cancun is This month, the federal Senate
tablish formal processes to examine them is essential to ensure progress towards a Fair, killed a progressive climate change
sensible. Ambitious and Binding deal.
bill without even bothering to
The principles laid out in the Annex V in- The analogy of Swiss cheese has been sug-
clude some useful language such as ‘mov- gested in this regard. Dearest delegates, ECO debate it.
ing beyond offsets’ to ‘net decrease in global urges you to plug the remaining holes in this #2 - Canada
GHGs’ and ‘preventing double counting’ of text – the result of which could well be the Conservative government plans
emissions. However, Parties should bear in politically balanced package you have been to cut the only major renewable
mind that there is no room – or indeed need – looking for.
energy support program, funding
for Canada’s climate science foun-
Canada Adrift
bearing deposits in central Canada), where
plans for a massive expansion just don’t line dation, etc.
up with pesky limits on their emissions. #3 - Canada
Let’s say you’re a tar sands loving North Enter John Baird, Canada’s brand new – er, Reduced its national target after
American government with a bit of a carbon not so new – environment minister. (Veteran
dependency problem. You need a clever way
Copenhagen and brought back
observers will remember him as the last min-
to get away with doing nothing on climate ister in Bali to oppose the science-based tar- environment minister John Baird.
change, and you notice that your neighbor to get range of 25-40% below 1990 in 2020.)
the south won’t have an easy time getting a Confronted about lining up with the neigh- lies at Exxon and other oil companies in the
cap-and-trade bill through its Congress. bors to Canada’s south, Baird had some battle to, as they so lyrically put it, ‘keep the
For Canada’s Prime Minister, Stephen choice words: the US proposal is ‘patchwork’ oil a-flowing’. And when one official from
Harper, the solution surely seemed obvious: and ‘very, very preliminary stuff’, covering Environment Canada pointed out that curbing
announce that you just can’t lift a finger to ‘a small, tiny percentage of new plants’. Yes, tar sands emissions is a good thing, her com-
deal with climate change unless the U.S. that would be in contrast to Canada’s com- ment was dismissed as ‘simply nutty’. Is it a
moves first. As they say in Canada: problem prehensive proposal of doing nothing what- coincidence that this sorry little episode took
solved, eh? soever for any percentage of its new plants. place the last time John Baird was environ-
Not quite, as it turns out. With the U.S. And this isn’t the first time that Canada’s ment minister?
Environmental Protection Agency moving to policy – 100% harmonized, as long as the Anyway, adding it up, it’s clear that Cana-
regulate greenhouse gas emissions from new US doesn’t do anything – has reared its ugly da’s three-bagger of Fossils from the first day
industrial facilities starting in 2011, Harper’s head. Internal emails from the Department of the Cancun talks is the most appropriate
plan of outsourcing climate policy to the of Foreign Affairs released yesterday show way to welcome John Baird and the govern-
U.S. meant that Canada would have to do the Canadian diplomats hard at work to ‘kill’ a ment he represents back to the negotiating ta-
same. That’s bad news for the tar sands (oil 2007 US clean fuels policy. They enlisted al- ble. Oh, Canada – how could you!

ISSUE NO 2 VOLUME CXXVII FREE OF CHARGE