Tag: China (unofficial)

CAN Intervention, AWG-LCA Closing plenary, 7 October 2011 (English)

 
CAN intervention
Closing AWG-LCA Plenary
Panama, October 7, 2011
 
Delivered by Sandra Guzmán, CEMDA
 

Thank you Mr Chair
 
I am speaking on behalf of the Climate Action Network.
 
To get to the deal we need in Durban, we have some advice for some of the countries present
here:
 
EU: You know what you have to do. The KP is in your hands
Australia and New Zealand: Get off the fence. Commit to a Kyoto 2nd Commitment Period.
Japan, Canada, Russia: don’t destroy our only legally binding multilateral treaty.
LDCs and AOSIS: stay strong. we stand in solidarity with you
US:  
     o Come with a mandate to reach agreement on long-term finance in Durban.  
     o Agree to a common accounting system based on the KP rules.
BASIC - your domestic climate leadership can shape the future climate regime we all need.
This is your time!
Africa: Durban is your COP, it is your moment, fight for the agreement you need.
 
To you all: Address the gap in ambition between your pledges and what the science requires.  
Be prepared to come to Durban TO ADOPT THE SECOND COMMITMENT PERIOD OF THE KYOTO
PROTOCOL and AGREE ON A MANDATE FOR A legally binding outcome in the LCA.  IT is time to
bring A SENSE OF URGENCY to these negotiations... IN DURBAN, YOU WILL GAIN A LOT IF YOU
GIVE A LITTLE.   

Thank you Mr Chair
 
 

 

Region: 

MRV works for me!

Jiayi Xu: MRV works for me

Jiayi Xu
Programme Officer
Institute for Environment and Development (IED)
China

Since February this year, I started my career in climate change. After an orientation from my supervisor FEI Xiaojing, the former South Capacity Building fellow of CAN-International, I started my participation in the CAN Measureable, Reportable and Verifiable (MRV) working group. The Bonn intersession was the starting point for me to get insight into my job. Panama is the second stop for my career to increase my understanding. However, compared to Bonn session, I am much clearer about the area in which I am interested.

There are many issues within MRV that are cross-cutting with other issues, but I am particularly interested in the framework of MRV. Personally, my expectation for Panama is to learn more about International Assessment and Review (IAR) for developed countries and International Consultation and Analysis (ICA) for developing countries. For the negotiations, my expectation for this intersession is to see the discussion of design, accounting rules, and components needed to get covered; most importantly, capacity building for MRV in developing countries. If the discussion continues, in Durban, it is highly possible to have some outcomes of the guidelines and timetable for IAR and ICA.

In Panama, I participated in the discussion in the CAN MRV working group to continue learning. Due to the clash with some important meetings, I have not attended informal meetings about MRV, which I planned to do. However, by attending CAN meetings, I am able to keep myself updated for MRV issues. Meanwhile, I attended side events to hear about some technical MRV issues, including accounting rules, systems, and tools.

The discussion about IAR and ICA tools and MRV capacity building are important in Panama. The MRV issue might achieve progressive outcomes in Durban COP17 if enough progress is made in Panama. Panama is the last intersessional before the COP, and any continuing discussion about MRV can be a positive signal to progress this issue. For example, the discussion about capacity building for developing country in ICA accommodates the feasibility and ability for developing countries to conduct an MRV process. The ‘dream’ of an MRV process is to ensure environmental integrity, collaborative work, and transparency of accounting for emissions in each country.

 

When I started work on MRV, I did not realize what this issues was all about and what it meant to track negotiations. Apart from my work on MRV, I also do adaptation research in vulnerable areas around climate change in western China. And I love it much more than tracking the MRV issue. Between Panama and Bonn, I continued my researche by interviewing farmers when visiting local communities. Once I was in a village in southwest China, where there used to be plenty of precipitation in summer carried over from East Asia and the Indian monsoons. This year it only rained three times, resulting in severe drought. A 70 year-old farmer said to me, “I have just been following the cultivating methods that I inherited from previous generations, it worked for decades. I have been kind and moral in my life. Why do I get this punishment? Please tell me how it happens and where I went wrong.” The punishment he referred to is that all the rice died in the fields because of the drought. He lost the major income resource for the year. Just before I arrived, he made a decision to harvest the rice 3 months earlier than usual and feed it to the livestock he kept, while waiting for help from the government. The women (in the picture above) experienced the same situation and made the same decision. I really wanted to say that it is not them that cause climate change, but it’s the whole world. It is not him, who only has one lamp and one television consuming electricity, that induces climate change. It is everyone in the cities, where there are energy-intensive industries that are the problem. Some countries in the world contribute more to his “punishment” than others. On my way back to my office, I realized a transparent monitoring system for countries to achieve environmental integrity is vital, and that is exactly the difficult issue I am now working on, MRV.

After that, I rescheduled my work plans and am balancing between tracking negotiations and my community adaptation research.  Now, I have a reason and a mission to be in Panama and see a point in devoting my time to the research of MRV. Rationally, it is impossible to end his “punishment” in the near future, but I still hope he will live a happy and prosperous life. I will continue my work, for adaptation, for MRV, for climate change.
 

Getting the Durban Deal Done

ECO has been clear in its call for a three-part outcome in Durban: adoption of a strong second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol; a mandate for negotiation of a more comprehensive and ambitious longer-term climate regime based on both scientific adequacy and the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capacities; and a package of decisions facilitating near-term action on all four building blocks of the Bali Action Plan and implementation of the Cancun Agreements.

Let’s make something else clear: building a long-term structure for fair and effective international action on climate change is important, but what really matters is meaningful action supporting peoples and communities already suffering the negative effects of climate change, and collective emission reductions at the scale and pace needed to avert even more catastrophic impacts in the future. The best legally binding treaty instruments in the world don’t amount to much without emission reduction ambition in line with the science and financial resources commensurate with the need.

 Coming out of Panama, there has been some progress in developing draft text on many of the elements of the Bali Action Plan and the Cancun Agreements.  But the prospects for linked agreements on extension of the Kyoto Protocol and the negotiations on a longer-term legally-binding instrument are not bright, absent significant changes in the negotiating positions of a number of key countries.  Let’s look at them in turn.

 EU.  Fair or not, the EU holds the key to the Durban outcome.  If the EU does not come to Durban with the clear goal of adopting a second commitment period (not some fuzzy political commitment) the Kyoto Protocol will wither and die.  On Thursday, the EU laid out a clear set of elements for negotiations over the longer-term treaty that would assure that a KP second commitment period is a bridge to a more comprehensive and ambitious legal framework. EU environment ministers need to be careful not to set overly stringent conditions for such negotiations when they meet next Monday in Luxembourg.  

 Australia and New Zealand. While the view from atop the fence is nice, these countries need to get off of it and make clear they are ready to join with the EU, Norway, and others in embracing a second KP commitment period.

 Japan, Russia, Canada.  These countries claim they are bailing out of Kyoto because it doesn’t cover a large enough portion of global emissions.  They need to come to Durban prepared to reconsider their position if agreement can be reached on launching negotiations on a longer-term treaty regime, or risk being perceived as multilateral treaty-killers, not treaty-builders.

 US. The one developed country that stayed out of Kyoto, in part because the Protocol didn’t include major developing countries, claims it is willing to enter into negotiations on a new legally-binding instrument.  But it has set very stringent conditions for the launch of such negotiations, while acknowledging that these conditions almost guarantee no agreement on a negotiating mandate in Durban.  Meanwhile, the US is struggling to meet its already inadequate emissions reduction commitment, and has been reluctant to discuss ways of meeting the $100 billion by 2020 annual climate finance goal its president committed to in Copenhagen.  At the very least, the US must contribute to such discussions in Durban, not attempt to block them.     

The LDCs and AOSIS. The moral power of the most vulnerable countries needs to be heard, highlighting both the existential crisis they face and the reprehensible failure of those responsible for the problem to face up to it.  These groups support both the extension of the KP and a mandate for negotiation of a new legally-binding instrument; they must continue to work together in Durban to achieve both of these goals.

The BASIC countries.All four of these countries are leaders in taking domestic actions to limit their emissions growth as their economies continue to rapidly develop.  Their leadership is also needed on the current fight to preserve a rules-based multilateral climate treaty regime.  They should certainly continue to demand a second Kyoto commitment period.  But they should also call the US’s bluff, by indicating their willingness to negotiate a more comprehensive long-term treaty regime including binding commitments for all but the Least Developed Countries, as long as it’s truly based on principles of equity and common but differentiated responsibility.              

 All countries must come to Durban prepared to negotiate in a spirit of compromise if we are to achieve the ambitious package of decisions needed to address the mounting climate crisis.  Ministers must take full advantage of their time together before Durban, at both the pre-COP ministerial consultations and the likely pre-Durban meeting of the Major Economies Forum, to explore constructive solutions to the current roadblocks to such a package of decisions.  Then in Durban, they must work actively under the guidance of the South African presidency to bring the deal home.  Their citizens need – and expect – nothing less.

Region: 

Breaking news: 5.8% increase in global CO2 emissions in 2010

Parties, we have a problem!!!

Global CO2 emissions did a full swing after the recession, growing more than 5% in 2010, according to a report published last week by the Netherlands Environmental Protection Agency. The highest increase in the last two decades fuels the climate crisis. Without accounting for the land-use sector, global CO2 emissions reached 33 billion tonnes, a 45% increase since 1990. , driven mostly by a 7.6 % increase in coal consumption. This means the world now uses coal for a third of its energy demand – the highest share since 1970. Use of other fossil fuels soared too, with natural gas consumption increasing by 7% and oil consumption jumping by 3%. (This increase takes place mostly in the developing countries, in order to reach decent living standards.)

The report, which uses data from the Statistical Review of World Energy, shows that the growth of emissions was driven in part by economic growth in China and India, with 10% or 9% increases in 2010 respectively. While India’s per capita emissions remain fairly low, China’s 6.8 tonnes per head per year already overtake those of large historic and de-facto polluters such as France, Italy and Spain. This follows at least in part because of moving manufacturing industries into developing countries, the output of which are largely used by developed countries.

So, clearly all Parties, especially those bound by the existing commitments for emission reduction need to do their share in Durban to lay the foundation for a solution to the problem (hint, hint: KP 2nd commitment period, LCA mandate for legally binding instrument, close the gigatonne gap, operationalize the Green Climate Fund, develop the technology mechanism and a robust MRV framework). Inspiration can also be found in more and more countries - in particular in the developing world - working towards a shift to low carbon economies. While the upward spiral of emissions in China is concerning from a global point of view, the country managed to double its wind and solar capacity for the 6th year in a row. If the developed countries and other major emitters followed China’s lead and achieved similar renewable energy growth rates, along with a push for energy efficiency, the World’s prospects of staying below 1.5° C or 2°C would be much better than they are now.Parties, we have a problem!!!

Global CO2 emissions did a full swing after the recession, growing more than 5% in 2010, according to a report published last week by the Netherlands Environmental Protection Agency. The highest increase in the last two decades fuels the climate crisis. Without accounting for the land-use sector, global CO2 emissions reached 33 billion tonnes, a 45% increase since 1990. , driven mostly by a 7.6 % increase in coal consumption. This means the world now uses coal for a third of its energy demand – the highest share since 1970. Use of other fossil fuels soared too, with natural gas consumption increasing by 7% and oil consumption jumping by 3%. (This increase takes place mostly in the developing countries, in order to reach decent living standards.)

The report, which uses data from the Statistical Review of World Energy, shows that the growth of emissions was driven in part by economic growth in China and India, with 10% or 9% increases in 2010 respectively. While India’s per capita emissions remain fairly low, China’s 6.8 tonnes per head per year already overtake those of large historic and de-facto polluters such as France, Italy and Spain. This follows at least in part because of moving manufacturing industries into developing countries, the output of which are largely used by developed countries.

So, clearly all Parties, especially those bound by the existing commitments for emission reduction need to do their share in Durban to lay the foundation for a solution to the problem (hint, hint: KP 2nd commitment period, LCA mandate for legally binding instrument, close the gigatonne gap, operationalize the Green Climate Fund, develop the technology mechanism and a robust MRV framework). Inspiration can also be found in more and more countries - in particular in the developing world - working towards a shift to low carbon economies. While the upward spiral of emissions in China is concerning from a global point of view, the country managed to double its wind and solar capacity for the 6th year in a row. If the developed countries and other major emitters followed China’s lead and achieved similar renewable energy growth rates, along with a push for energy efficiency, the World’s prospects of staying below 1.5° C or 2°C would be much better than they are now.

Topics: 
Region: 

Shan Shui Conservation Centre

Home Landscape Conservation Center is registered with biodiversity conservation organizations, currently mainly in western China, demonstration of man and nature live in harmony instance, and to promote nature conservation in national and local policies and public awareness in the mainstream. Landscape Conservation Center (the "landscape") is the protection of international partners. Conservation International (CI) is a global biodiversity conservation in international civil society organizations.

We want a world: the human, and human needs and aspirations of all - spiritual, cultural and economic, can be forever and other life on Earth in harmony. We expect China to embark on a eco-friendly development, set an example for the world. 
    
We firmly believe: Only the Earth's natural heritage is protected, our children Caineng spiritually, culturally and economically prosperous.Our mission is to protect the Earth's remaining natural heritage - biodiversity in China, through innovative solutions, to launch government, business and civil society efforts to prove that human society is the ability to live in harmony with nature.

Our role: to harmonize conservation and development model of possible options as a catalyst, coordinator and supporter, to promote the process of China's biodiversity conservation and mainstreaming, and promote global environmental protection in China's positive role in the field.

Contact Information: 
China
CN

Institute for Environment & Development - China

Institute of Environment and Development (IED/LEAD-China) was founded in 1994 as a non-government and non-profit organization to implement Chinaprogram of Leadership for Environment and Development. It operates under the leadership of Board of Directors chaired by Mr. Qu Geping, former chairman of the Commission of Environment and Natural Resources of National People’s Congress.

Core faculty of IED/LEAD-China guides, plans and quality-controls teaching/training, research and information development activities in the fields of environment and development. A small management team is responsible for its operation to be transparent and collaborative.

VISION

Enhance equal dialogue and participation for a society of greater sustainability.

MISSION

Building the capacity and improving the institutional arrangement toward a sustainable society.

Contact Information: 
No.19 Min-Wan-Yuan Hong Tai Building, Dong District
100013 Beijing
China
CN

Pages

Subscribe to Tag: China (unofficial)