Doing the rounds at Doha
Did you know that with existing levels of CO2 in the atmosphere a .7oC rise in temperature is a given? Now, climate negotiators and national representatives are back to putting their heads together trying to make sure that our planet doesn’t get too hot to handle…
Did you hear? The World Meteorological Organisation dropped a bomb recently! In its annual Greenhouse Gas Bulletin, it said that 2011 saw atmospheric levels of greenhouse gases (GHG) reach record levels. Scarier still is the United Nations Environment Program and European Climate Foundation’s claim that global temperatures would rise by 3-5°C this century if nations do not step up climate actions.
And we have reason to worry as 
South Asia is most vulnerable to climate change-related sea level rise. Last I heard, at Cancun in 2010 negotiators agreed to take on non-legally binding voluntary emission reductions. But come climate talks at Durban in 2011, promises were either forgotten or backtracked upon. Though the Durban Plan for Enhanced Action called for Parties to walk the talk, we have seen little being done in reality.
Now, with little expectation for the survival of Kyoto Protocol, climate negotiations are in need of a serious dose of energy boosters. Starting November 26, climate negotiators at the 18th Conference of Parties (COP 18) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in Doha, Qatar, have to keep track of many parallel discussions and inter-connected negotiations on the sidelines to come to a viable outcome for the global climate. Gobar Times and I will help you keep track of it all by breaking down the seven channels of climate change talks…
1 The Kyoto confusion
It involved approximately 123 hours of negotiations to come into being and another 200 + hours of negotiations are seeing it on its way out.
That is right, the 15-year-old Kyoto Protocol (KP), with legally binding targets for Parties to cut GHG emissions, is on its last leg. Now, there is talk this way and that of a new and improved version of Kyoto Protocol, which would include all Parties. The most important issue for discussion at Doha will be finalising a second commitment period for KP as the first commitment ends in December 2012.
Will the next commitment period extend over the next five years or next eight years? You see, the next Protocol is projected to be agreed to by 2015 and will only come into force in 2020, as ratification takes that long. So an eight year commitment period would effectively cover the gap. “To a large extent, attention of Parties will be directed towards Kyoto Protocol II,” says RR Rashmi, Joint Secretary, Ministry of Environment and Forests, and one of the chief negotiators for India, “We could pass a legal agreement and get it ratified.
But ratification process is different for different countries. A provisional agreement is out of the question, as there is not enough time and rollback on commitments can happen at any time. There is also the option of passing a COP decision, but commitment period is the moot question. There is no doubt that an agreement will emerge by end of COP 18 or latest by December 31.”
The European Union aspired to reduce emissions by 20 per cent from 1990 levels by 2020, while Japan pledged 30 per cent emission reductions by 2020. US participation is crucial, but it looks doubtful. China and India would receive substantial fillip from the US’s participation in the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol. Australia has assured its nod for KP II.
Kyoto Timeline
Kyoto: 1997
Born this way: Kyoto Protocol came into being, after intense negotiations, at COP 3 in Kyoto, Japan, on December 11, 1997, and entered into force on February 16, 2005.
Marrakech: 2001
Fine-tuning: At COP 7 in Marrakesh, the Protocol was fine-tuned with features such as compliance, operational rules, consequences of noncompliance being thrashed out by negotiators.
These became part of the Marrakesh Accords.
Durban: 2011
Durban enhanced action plan: In Durban, governments decided that the Kyoto Protocol would move into a second commitment period in 2013, without any gaps.
The range of GHGs covered by the Protocol was also enhanced.
2011
Walk-in & walk-out: On December 15, 2011, Canada formally pulled out of the Protocol.
The number of Parties to the Kyoto Protocol presently stands at 191 States and 1 regional economic integration organisation.
Bali: 2012
Closer to deadline: In July 2012, 29 countries met in Bali for the Cartagena Dialogue for Progressive Action to strengthen consensus on a legally binding treaty to replace Kyoto Protocol.
The US
The United States was, as usual, missing in action at Bali. Countries in attendance included Norway, Denmark, Australia, Germny, France and the United Kingdom
Doha: 2012
“Doha should deliver on a second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol starting on 1 January 2013,” the EU demanded in a position paper released in Bali.
The first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol comes to an end this year, December 2012.
What remains to be seen: Whether KP II rises from the ashes as a phoenix – with all Parties agreeing to binding emissions cuts and developed countries taking on more responsibility OR KP II becomes a dull dud - the US had signed the Protocol, but never ratified it. It is not pegged to feature in the second commitment period either. Japan, New Zealand, Canada and Russia have decided to not be part of the second commitment period.
2 Short-term squabbles mar long term action
Set up with a lofty mandate of finding a comprehensive climate agreement that all parties agree to, AWG-LCA is struggling to survive now In a whirlwind of last-minute decisions at Durban, it was decided that the Ad hoc Working Group on Long term Cooperative Action (AWG-LCA) would come to a conclusion about a long-term climate agreement at COP 18 in Doha.
“The AWG-LCA should wrap up its work as decided by governments in Durban,” said UNFCCC Executive Secretary Christina Figueres in a web adress ahead of an informal meeting on the Doha mandate in Bangkok in August 2012, “In Bangkok, parties must assess what must be done to bring about a smooth closure that completes the work on the agreed outcome of AWG-LCA under the Bali Action Plan.”
What that means is that the objective – to strengthen climate change agreements in the long term and stick to the 2°C goal – will be assessed and reviewed at Doha. This long-term agreement will be framed around a global goal of emission reductions for 2050, peaking year and time frame for peaking of emissions of developed and developing countries.
The much-awaited outcome would address the nitty-gritties that go with an agreement of this sort such as assessment process, general framework, type of units and tracking mechanisms, general modalities and procedures.
Lots of big names and even bigger bodies that will keep track of the global goal, global emissions and long-term implementation of this global goal will be institutionalised and operationalised by the time negotiations close. Or so is the hope…
3 Cash for climate relief
US$100 billion by 2020! Our planet is saved! Or so we thought… Three years on and not a single penny has found its way into the Green Climate Fund
At COP 16 in Cancun in 2010, negotiators pledged to save the world from global warming with a one-ofa- kind fund – to promote projects and programmes in developing countries for mitigating climate change related destruction.
A couple of years have passed, but still no money in the GCF.
This lack of action and initiative has left developing countries disgruntled. At Doha, renewed cries for mobilising money towards this fund shall be heard.
They demand that developed countries pledge funds for the period between 2012 – 2020 so that projects running on the ground and in the offing are not affected.
Decisions will be made about accounting, reporting and monitoring procedures for this money.
Not much word from countries like Japan, Australia and the EU block about how much moolah they are going to shell out for the GCF… Norway gave Guyana US$250 million to save 16 million hectares of rainforest, while the EU is paying for China to set up a carbon capture and store-coal power plant. Why then, is the GCF at zero balance?
4 Trading in hot air
With the end of the first commitment period of Kyoto Protocol in December 2012, the first phase of the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) also comes to a close…
What becomes of the remaining emissions budget of the countries that have managed to maintain or stay below the cap on their emissions? How do countries use carbon offsets from CDM projects to meet their emission reduction targets under UNFCCC if they have not signed the Kyoto Protocol? What becomes of the surplus Assigned Amount Unit (AAUs) – carry them over or junk them?
These questions have been plaguing climate negotiators since the Durban Climate Summit in 2011. What remains to be seen now, is whether concrete answers are given at Doha. Many external factors will have to be considered – the fluctuating (and extremely low) price of carbon; the risks and implications of carrying-over surplus AAUs, and how emissions reductions must remain an environmental issue and not a marketbased element.
Parties will also be discussing an entirely new market mechanism for offsetting carbon emissions. The Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) were last seen pushing for a mechanism within the UN framework, while Australia wants to move out from under the UN aegis. For now, discussions have centered round the supply of carbon credits.
At Doha, delegates shall address the demand. Emissions targets, stricter ones, are what will create demand for carbon offset credits. The modalities and procedures for this should be worked out at COP 18.
PRICE OF CARBON:
CO2 prices have been bouncing off the walls of carbon markets all through the year. The 2008 economic crisis had already knocked off close to 80 per cent of the value of CO2. Earlier in the year, carbon prices peaked after Germany decided to phase out nuclear power, but by June prices fell following European Commissions’ push for mandatory energy efficiency improvements. Prices jumped again with increasing oil and gas prices and did another summersault in response to the European Parliament’s decision to set aside 1.4 billion emission allowances.
MAJOR PLAYERS:
European Energy Exchange (EEU) – Located in Frankfurt, Germany, it runs short-term trading for Germany, France, Switzerland and Austria; Nord Pool – Second largest exchange in EU emission allowances and single financial energy market for Norway, Denmark, Sweden and Finland; European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) – Largest and first emissions trading scheme in the world covering 11,000 emitting establishments in 27 EU nations plus Iceland, Norway and Leichtenstein;
APEX-ENDEX – Anglo-dutch energy exchange expanded to include emissions trade in 2010, by acquiring Climex carbon emissions trading platform. Operates derivatives market for Belgium, the UK and the Netherlands; Australia Pacific Stock Exchange (APX) or Australia Climate Exchange (ACX) – Operating in emissions trade since 2007, ACX offers an alternate trading venue for Chinese traders as well
Underbelly
In July this year, CDM Watch (now Carbon Market Watch), global carbon markets watchdog, submitted a revision proposal to the CDM Executive Board (EB) showing that manufacturers of the refrigerant HCFC 22, were gaming the market to gain extra benefits from carbon emission trade. HFC 23, a waste gas generated during HCFC 22 production, is a GHG. CDM Watch discovered that manufacturers of HCFC 22 were producing these gases simply to destroy waste HFC 23 and gain credits. There was deliberate production of HCFC 22 that did not match demand. CER issued from these projects comprise 52 per cent of CER issued till date. The CDM's HFC 23 projects pay 65-75 times more for HFC 23 destruction than the manufacturers pay for HCFC 22 production. An investigation is underway to plug the loopholes in the system…
KEY: CDM- CLean Development Mechanism;
HCFC - Hydrochloroflourocarbons;
HFC - Hydroflourocarbons;
CER - Certified Emission Reduction
5 Climate friendly technology
Mooted at COP 15 in Copenhagen in 2009, technology transfer and finance have not received sufficient global attention as is evident from almost defunct GCF and Intellectual Property stagnation
The Technology Mechanism was established as part of the Cancun Agreements in December 2010. The objective here is to facilitate capacity building among vulnerable developing countries through public private partnerships for transferring technology; promoting research and innovations; setting up national, regional and international technology centres, and encouraging use of technology road maps.
Under this mechanism, a Technology Executive Committee (TEC) and a Climate Technology Centre and Network (CTCN) were set up. Since both TEC and CTCN will be operationalised at Doha, it is safe to assume that the work done towards any of these goals stands at zero per cent. At Doha, decisions such as the relationship between TEC and CTCN, through a Subsidiary Body of Implementation, will be worked out.
Plus, the procedures for operation for the two bodies and a plan of action for the next few years will be decided. Tech transfer issues closely tie in to Intellectual Property Rights of parties involved. IPRs are governed by various other Conventions such as Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) and hence, are a complicated matter to resolve. At Doha, a text on IPRs is to be released.
6 The future we want
IPCC says emissions must peak over the next 10-15 years and then reduce to well below 2000 levels to keep temperature rise under 2°C
The stickiest piece of the climate pie – a comprehensive climate policy for the period post-2020 – will see many negotiators get their hands dirty at Doha. So far discussions have ranged from bridging the ambition gap in the pre-2020 period to moving climate negotiations entirely out of the ambit of the United Nations.
When parties met in pre-Doha sessions at Bangkok in September 2012 it was with the mandate to put together a framework for a post-2020 deal. But AOSIS countries maintain that the ambition gap – amount of emissions to be reduced by 2020 to keep temperature rise within the 2°C target – must be addressed first.
India, Brazil, South Africa, and China called for the principle of equity in future agreements, while the US called for a case-by-case approach suggesting that various national circumstances and evolving economic status of different countries need to be taken into account. At Doha, things could swing either way.
Either a fish market would ensue where no discussions are fruitful and the final outcome is compromised or there could be a peaceful falling together of various stands like a jigsaw puzzle. Most importantly, these questions might find answers - Who will take up the onus of bridging the ambition gap – developed or developing countries?
What principles shall govern this post-2020 deal? Shall the principles of equity, common but differentiated responsibility be reflected in the new deal? Will the IPCC mechanism continue to inform climate negotiations and agreements? Or will voluntary obligations and mitigation activities emerge as the new mantra?
7 What do we have to lose?
While debate still revolves around adaptation versus mitigation, extreme weather events and threats to food security are raising an alarm around the world
Since climate negotiations began under the UNFCCC, the concept of adaptation, loss and damage has been a popular talking point. It pushes for rich, developed nations to pay for damage and losses from climate change related events in vulnerable, poor countries.
The pioneer of this movement was AOSIS. Understandably so, since some of them would be wiped clean off the map in case of climate change related sea-level rise. Of late, the discussions on adaptation have fizzled out and have been replaced by loss and damage issue.
This will receive a push from AOSIS and Like-minded Developing Countries at Doha. Many workshops and meetings were held throughout 2012 around the world – Latin America, Africa and Asia – to discuss key issues such as assessing the risk of loss and damage from climate change; addressing these risks and the role of UNFCCC in addressing them.
At Doha, the outcome of these meetings, two technical papers and one review shall be presented to set the agenda for the working programme for COP 18. G 77 countries and China have expressed their anticipation for this issue reaching an outcome at Doha.
Establishing an international mechanism for assessing and addressing risk has, so far, never received consensus at negotiations. Observers are of the opinion that pilot programmes may emerge at Doha with a learning-by-doing objective.
Halloween Horrors
Three storms hit three different regions of the world just a few days apart from each other. Coincidence or climate change? Are extreme weather events the ugly heads of global warming?
NIGHT-TIME VIEW OF SANDY'S LANDFALL
As Hurricane Sandy made a historic landfall on the New Jersey coast during the night of October 29, the Visible Infrared Imaging Radiometer Suite (VIIRS) on NASA's Suomi National Polar-orbiting Partnership (NPP) satellite captured this night-time view of the storm.
Photo Credit: CIMSS/University, Wisconsin-Madison/NASA/NOAA
TROPICAL STORM SON-TINH IN SOUTH CHINA SEA
On October 26, Sontinh's western edge had already moved away from the Philippines when NASA's Terra satellite flew over it. Powerful thunderstorms in the northwestern
quadrant of the storm, and in the storm's center were felt along its wake.
Photo credit: NASA Goddard MODIS Rapid Response Team
FLOODS IN THE AFTERMATH
This photo, taken on October 29, shows a flooded street in Avenue C, New York City minutes before the power station blew out and the whole
neighbourhood lost power.
Photo credit: David Shankbone
RAIN AND THUNDER
Torrential rains and strong winds lashed Chennai as Nilam touched down. Marina beach in Chennai feels the fury in this photo.
Photo credit: Vinoth Chandar
TROPICAL CYCLONE NILAM
NASA's Terra satellite captured this image of cyclone Nilam over southern India on November 1. The cyclone made landfall on October 30.
Photo credit: NASA Goddard MODIS Rapid Response Team
Print
Email