Quote of the Day: “Canada is becoming a bargain discount version of Australia of old.”
Yvo de Boer, UN Climate Chief
Canada is saying no China, no climate deal: Unless all major emitters accept binding targets, Canada will not. Considering China is the largest emitter in the world (or soon to be, depending on whose stats you use) and we live in a globalized economy, this seems prudent from both an environmental and economic perspective. On the other hand, the environmental group pleas do not sound that sensible from an environmental or economic perspective. Their proposal is for rich countries to accept binding targets, while industrializing greenhouse gas powerhouses like China get what amounts to a free pass and scoop up the bulk of new business investment sensitive to carbon pricing along their greenhouse gas belching way.
Today, I finally figured why I was so conflicted, finding myself agreeing with the perennial Fossil of the Day, rather than the defenders of Mother Nature. Both parties are right in a way. Canada is right that if you don’t involve China, you don’t make much of a dent in emissions and would economically hurt countries that try to make a dent. The environmentalists are right that asking fast-growing countries with hundreds of millions of people in poverty to accept the economic straightjacket of binding targets is like banning hockey in Canada—there is absolutely no chance. So by making this demand contingent on any deal, Canada is either engaging in some grandmaster chess negotiating or spectacular sabotage of a future climate agreement. For a government that prides itself on realism, I can’t understand why, if they are sincere about getting a valid climate deal that keeps temperatures from increasing by more than 2 degrees Celsius as Baird said is necessary a few days ago in the House of Commons, they don’t square their stated economic and environmental objectives with a mechanism that is not a non-starter with China. It’s not because one doesn’t exist.
China made that clear this week, saying that it would be willing to accept intensity targets if the developed world shows leadership. This titanic shift in China’s negotiating stance opens the door to make a breakthrough in Bali that satisfies Canada’s stated environmental and economic principles, by shifting the focus away from many national carbon caps to one global greenhouse gas target (for one atmosphere) joined at the hip with an intensity mechanism, such as a carbon tax. The door is wide-open for this, but the question is does Canada want to blaze a breakthrough in Bali, or will it continue to pop poison pills? Maybe Mother Nature was sent signal to shake things up with the mild earth quake that brought tremors through Bali this evening.
Newsflash: On December 13th Minister Baird and Stephane Dion are slated to be on the same panel together in Bali on the topic of Canadian action on climate change federally and provincially. One of the other speakers on the panel told me that she plans on holding her remarks to 1.5 minutes in order to allow maximum time for the two elected officials to hash it out.
Adventures in Bali-Land:
You can tell a lot about the five main groups of people at the Bali meetings by checking out their quarters.
The press tent provides abundant access of the lifeblood of journalists: coffee and wireless internet.
The international organizations have staid unassuming booths.
The wealthy carbon traders have fancy booths with booth bunnies in many cases, and put on great spreads of food which lead to massive migration (and free bike scarcity) of delegates during lunch time to the Grand Hyatt where their events take place.
The civil society groups have outdoor canopies with no air conditioning and no tasty free food, so they lack traffic.
Most of the national delegations have tents too. Almost none of them lock the doors to the tents. The Russians, hardened by the Al Capone capitalism of their homeland, do lock up the tent. Most of the tents are pretty makeshift like a student dorm room, but not the French tent. Their tent has two nice plants and a cappuccino machine and even though it is temporary, their tent has been made to have a classy feel, as only the French know how.
Who’s hot?
• Canadian Boreal: Canada’s boreal forest is a significant part of the global climate change solution, according to Chris Henschel of Canadian Parks and Wilderness who will be making a presentation this Saturday on the topic. The Canadian Boreal stores an estimated 186 billion tones of carbon in forest and peat ecosystems, equivalent to 27 years worth of the world’s carbon emission from burning fossil fuels. To help preserve this massive carbon sink, Henchel is encouraging Canada and the other countries that are spearheading a land use, land-use change and forestry sector review to do three key things:
1. Require mandatory reporting of all emissions from all land types (both forests and managed forests, peat lands, and agriculture). This is not the case right now. For instance Canada’s approximated 200 million ha of managed forests are excluded from present accounting under the Kyoto Protocol.
2. Rules and mechanisms for protecting natural carbon storehouses (forests, peat lands, permafrost soils, agrilands).
3. Introduce segmented liability so that countries are responsible for emissions over which they have control over, and are not responsible for phenomena over which they do not have control, such as pine beetle infestation or forest fires.
• World’s Top Climate Scientists from the IPCC: For issuing the Bali Climate Declaration by Scientists calling on governments to reduce emissions “by at least 50 per cent below 1990 levels by the year 2050.”
• Minister Baird: For agreeing to be on the same panel with Stephane Dion.
Who’s not?
• Canada: German Watch ranked Canada as the fourth worst country out of 56 on an assessment of climate mitigation policies. Perhaps aware of how bad things are going in Canada emissions-wise, Canada tried to take some of the gusto out of the compliance committee hardliners (mostly from African nations) that want countries that fail to meet their Kyoto obligations to be punished. Canada’s response: to propose that the countries who appoint representatives to look at this matter should be responsible for their own travel and accommodation costs. .
• IPCC Chairman, RK Pachauri: I bumped in IPCC Chair, RK Pachauri, and asked him what he thought of the UN Human Development Report’s lead author calling for a shift from a cap-and-trade to carbon tax. His curt reply: “I’d rather not talk about it,” before eschewing a free bike to jump in a taxi to motor off.
• Me: At the President’s Party tonight by the pool area with Balinese dancers, the beerless Climate Chief, Yvo de Boer, caught me double fisting a couple of beers and, possibly fresh from going over equity principles in one of the negotiating groups, asked me “why do you have two beers?”
Saturday, December 8, 2007
Thursday, December 6, 2007
New Bali vocab.
Term of the Day: Self Financing Climate Compact (When levies on mitigation are used to finance adaptation, and climate regime begins to pay for itself. Translated to English: money raised from carbon levies could be directed toward drought-early warning systems, drought resistant crops, dykes, flood proof houses on stilts, or water wings)
Other Term of the Day: GNGO. I met a nice lady from the China Association for NGO Cooperation, which is a GNGO—a Governmental Non-Government Organization.
Who’s hot?
-Indonesian hospitality: The Balinese people, predominantly Hindu, are some of the most smiling warm people I have come across. Even their horns honk unobnoxiously. A couple of examples: I fell asleep at the Climate Change Conference 5-Star hotel in the lobby after filing a blog and drinking a beer, as a procrastination effort to avoid my two hour scooter ride to my sleeping quarters located a fairly well-priced but not-so-convenient 2 hour ride away, assuming my sense of navigation didn’t betray me. If this happened in Toronto’s downtown Hyatt, a rather burly security guard would wake you up with threatening questions and sweep you out onto the street like a happy wanderer. Not in Bali. In Bali, the small soft spoken man with a smile wakes you up gently to offer you a pillow. In the morning, it gets even better. A breakfast buffet fit for a king awaits. It was only free the first time as I discovered on my second try, if you come after it officially opens and there are people to get your room number or credit card in its absence. At 186,000 Rupiah (about $19), it isn’t cheap, so I stocked up on food including boxes of Muesli and loaf of bread to see me through the day. Noticing all the extra food I had, the nice Balinese waitress brought me a doggy bag to pack up.
-Germany: Towards, the end of the day, a German friend, Prof. Schellnhuber, who advises Chancellor Merkel wrote with some news that made me want to say Ich Bin Berliner: “My spirits are fine, since the German cabinet will agree today on a policy package that will reduce national GHG emissions by 40% by 2020 (in comparison to 1990)!”
-China: China proposed a special provision to reserve a place to allow the US to join in post-Kyoto commitment discussions, should a future administration be so inclined.
-The UN bikes: 13 of the 200 complimentary bikes to wheel around the resort compound were nicked during the first two days of meetings. People are voting with their pedals for green mobility. Come to think of it, this climate change crowd really likes their bikes. My bike was involuntarily liberated in Toronto while I watched Al Gore deliver his Inconvenient Truth slide show. This kind of free-wheeling would never happen at an oil and gas or auto show.
-New Zealand: New Zealand’s Climate Change Minister announced a moratorium on building new fossil fuel power generation plants for the next ten years.
Who’s not?
-Security guards in UN tents at nighttime: The A/C was on so high last night that the poor bugger was shivering and wearing what appeared to be a light winter jacket.
-Saudi Arabia: Won top prize for Fossil of the Day Awards. Their citation read: First prize goes to Saudi Arabia for a long and rambling intervention this morning complaining that the Kyoto protocol has an unfair focus on CO2 (and then called for prioritization of carbon capture and storage, which is concentrated on CO2). And secondly, for saying that we "should not attach an economic element to the noble cause of fighting climate change"--when for years, Saudi Arabia has been trying to undermine the fight against climate change specifically by campaigning by alleging adverse economic effects! Saudi Arabia is presently classified as a developing country.” Climate Action Network is urging that the Saudis, along with South Korea and Singapore, should join the group of countries subject to deep binding targets (During the Fossil of the Day Awards, May Jeong was called in to represent Japan—she did a good job despite her North Korean roots).
-India: India said it is happy to agree to a binding target of not exceeding the industrialized world’s per capita emissions. This sounds perfectly fair. If China and India can both get their per capita emissions up to where we are in Canada right now, global emissions will triple overnight, ensuring that our grandkids have the sole option of visiting Bali on a scuba diving expedition. Meanwhile, both South Africa and Brazil have hinted that they would be willing to except binding targets by 2018.
Tidbits from Today:
-According to UN Climate chief Yvo de Boer, governments have agreed to set up a global fund to fight deforestation.
-Belarus, Russia and Ukraine were making a strong case to be able to cash in on the credits from their hot air, thanks to Mikhail Gorbachev’s fumbling away the Soviet Union, which led to an economic implosion and did wonders for reducing greenhouse gases.
-The Africans seem especially keen on accountability and ensuring that countries that fail to meet their Kyoto targets are punished. I didn’t hear Canada’s reaction to this, but I can imagine it was similar to Japan’s as they are on the same page for almost all other issues. Japan said “we think it would be counterproductive to have legally binding punishment for countries that fail to meet their commitments.”
-The $64 million dollar question: Two per cent of clean development mechanism (CDM) financial flows are supposed to be levied to go toward adaptation. In the most recent year, about $5 billion worth of clean development mechanism projects were done, but only $36 million worth of adaptation funds were generated. So what happened to the other $64 million? I think there is a technical answer and I am hoping to find this out tomorrow.
-CANbiguity. The Climate Action Network International has a concise and sufficiently vague proposal to be supported by anyone who wants real action on protecting the climate in a fair way. The plan calls for developed countries to reduce emissions by at least 30 per cent by 2020 and at least 80 per cent by 2050, from a 1990 base year. The plan also calls for 50 per cent GHG emissions reductions by 2050 globally. The plan is silent on required reductions for developing countries, including the giant tiger and elephant in the room. But meeting the 50 per cent below 1990 by 2050 will mean that developing countries have to reduce their emissions by 20 per cent, which is a huge gap from their business-as-usual scenarios. Give the recent UN Human Development Report that kudos for having the kahunas to say the 20 per cent reduction number of developing countries out loud.
-China called for a large technology transfer fund to be funded by developed countries.
-Rumour is that the US is hoping to use the trade ministers’ meeting this weekend in Bali to get a technology transfer fund that is outside of the UN.
Other Term of the Day: GNGO. I met a nice lady from the China Association for NGO Cooperation, which is a GNGO—a Governmental Non-Government Organization.
Who’s hot?
-Indonesian hospitality: The Balinese people, predominantly Hindu, are some of the most smiling warm people I have come across. Even their horns honk unobnoxiously. A couple of examples: I fell asleep at the Climate Change Conference 5-Star hotel in the lobby after filing a blog and drinking a beer, as a procrastination effort to avoid my two hour scooter ride to my sleeping quarters located a fairly well-priced but not-so-convenient 2 hour ride away, assuming my sense of navigation didn’t betray me. If this happened in Toronto’s downtown Hyatt, a rather burly security guard would wake you up with threatening questions and sweep you out onto the street like a happy wanderer. Not in Bali. In Bali, the small soft spoken man with a smile wakes you up gently to offer you a pillow. In the morning, it gets even better. A breakfast buffet fit for a king awaits. It was only free the first time as I discovered on my second try, if you come after it officially opens and there are people to get your room number or credit card in its absence. At 186,000 Rupiah (about $19), it isn’t cheap, so I stocked up on food including boxes of Muesli and loaf of bread to see me through the day. Noticing all the extra food I had, the nice Balinese waitress brought me a doggy bag to pack up.
-Germany: Towards, the end of the day, a German friend, Prof. Schellnhuber, who advises Chancellor Merkel wrote with some news that made me want to say Ich Bin Berliner: “My spirits are fine, since the German cabinet will agree today on a policy package that will reduce national GHG emissions by 40% by 2020 (in comparison to 1990)!”
-China: China proposed a special provision to reserve a place to allow the US to join in post-Kyoto commitment discussions, should a future administration be so inclined.
-The UN bikes: 13 of the 200 complimentary bikes to wheel around the resort compound were nicked during the first two days of meetings. People are voting with their pedals for green mobility. Come to think of it, this climate change crowd really likes their bikes. My bike was involuntarily liberated in Toronto while I watched Al Gore deliver his Inconvenient Truth slide show. This kind of free-wheeling would never happen at an oil and gas or auto show.
-New Zealand: New Zealand’s Climate Change Minister announced a moratorium on building new fossil fuel power generation plants for the next ten years.
Who’s not?
-Security guards in UN tents at nighttime: The A/C was on so high last night that the poor bugger was shivering and wearing what appeared to be a light winter jacket.
-Saudi Arabia: Won top prize for Fossil of the Day Awards. Their citation read: First prize goes to Saudi Arabia for a long and rambling intervention this morning complaining that the Kyoto protocol has an unfair focus on CO2 (and then called for prioritization of carbon capture and storage, which is concentrated on CO2). And secondly, for saying that we "should not attach an economic element to the noble cause of fighting climate change"--when for years, Saudi Arabia has been trying to undermine the fight against climate change specifically by campaigning by alleging adverse economic effects! Saudi Arabia is presently classified as a developing country.” Climate Action Network is urging that the Saudis, along with South Korea and Singapore, should join the group of countries subject to deep binding targets (During the Fossil of the Day Awards, May Jeong was called in to represent Japan—she did a good job despite her North Korean roots).
-India: India said it is happy to agree to a binding target of not exceeding the industrialized world’s per capita emissions. This sounds perfectly fair. If China and India can both get their per capita emissions up to where we are in Canada right now, global emissions will triple overnight, ensuring that our grandkids have the sole option of visiting Bali on a scuba diving expedition. Meanwhile, both South Africa and Brazil have hinted that they would be willing to except binding targets by 2018.
Tidbits from Today:
-According to UN Climate chief Yvo de Boer, governments have agreed to set up a global fund to fight deforestation.
-Belarus, Russia and Ukraine were making a strong case to be able to cash in on the credits from their hot air, thanks to Mikhail Gorbachev’s fumbling away the Soviet Union, which led to an economic implosion and did wonders for reducing greenhouse gases.
-The Africans seem especially keen on accountability and ensuring that countries that fail to meet their Kyoto targets are punished. I didn’t hear Canada’s reaction to this, but I can imagine it was similar to Japan’s as they are on the same page for almost all other issues. Japan said “we think it would be counterproductive to have legally binding punishment for countries that fail to meet their commitments.”
-The $64 million dollar question: Two per cent of clean development mechanism (CDM) financial flows are supposed to be levied to go toward adaptation. In the most recent year, about $5 billion worth of clean development mechanism projects were done, but only $36 million worth of adaptation funds were generated. So what happened to the other $64 million? I think there is a technical answer and I am hoping to find this out tomorrow.
-CANbiguity. The Climate Action Network International has a concise and sufficiently vague proposal to be supported by anyone who wants real action on protecting the climate in a fair way. The plan calls for developed countries to reduce emissions by at least 30 per cent by 2020 and at least 80 per cent by 2050, from a 1990 base year. The plan also calls for 50 per cent GHG emissions reductions by 2050 globally. The plan is silent on required reductions for developing countries, including the giant tiger and elephant in the room. But meeting the 50 per cent below 1990 by 2050 will mean that developing countries have to reduce their emissions by 20 per cent, which is a huge gap from their business-as-usual scenarios. Give the recent UN Human Development Report that kudos for having the kahunas to say the 20 per cent reduction number of developing countries out loud.
-China called for a large technology transfer fund to be funded by developed countries.
-Rumour is that the US is hoping to use the trade ministers’ meeting this weekend in Bali to get a technology transfer fund that is outside of the UN.
Wednesday, December 5, 2007
Romance, Bali-style.
Best Quote: “We are well past the first date. Rio was 15 years ago. We may not be married but we are at least at the prenuptial agreement.”
-Alden Meyer, Union of Concerned Scientists, commenting on Yvo de Boer’s suggestion that Bali is the first date on the road to a comprehensive climate compact.
Worst Quote: “We were humiliated and our ancestors were bullied.”
-China’s spontaneous outburst during morning plenary squabbles over whether technology transfer should be a separate agenda item or not. This discussion lasted for the better part of the day, as the icebergs slowly melt away. Later in the evening, the parties to the conference came around to China and the G-77’s view that technology transfer should be a separate agenda item.
Term of the Day: Conservation refugee (A person who is made homeless or prevented from sustaining their livelihood because a forest they depend upon (for firewood, building materials, ect.) is made into a conservation zone and put off limits to them.
Who’s hot?
-Canada: The day didn’t start out so well for Canada. The morning press conference by Climate Action Network singled out Canada as part of an evil band of countries trying to derail the Bali talks, by infuriating China and India with calls for them to agree to emissions caps. I asked Stephen Guilbeault of Equiterre what was so bad about requiring fast-industrializing countries like China and India to bend down their emissions curves, given that that China’s business as usual emissions growth alone would put it on track to be emitting twice the total greenhouse gas emissions as the next 26 nations combined in the next 25 years, thus ensuring that global temperatures exceed 2 degrees Celsius increase regardless of what the industrialized world does. Guilbeault’s answer was that Canada is not being sincere. On one hand, Minister Baird tells the House of Commons that a temperature increase of 2 degrees is unacceptable and will bring severe hardship, on the other Canada is abandoning its modest Kyoto obligations. “So,” Guilbeault asked, “are these guys serious or are they just wasting our time?”
In the afternoon, despite being shamed with a Fossil of the Day Award by the Climate Action Network on Monday (and Tuesday), Canada’s lead negotiator showed up to a Climate Action Network side event on what a post-2012 framework should look like. He stuck around for most of the two hours, but I felt a little bad when he asked what the civil society groups were expecting to happen in Bali, and nobody really answered his question. First, he gets a lump of coal for during the wrong thing, and when he asks what is the right thing, no answer is forthcoming.
Canada’s delegation also met with the Youth Delegation (which at 32 members is the largest youth contingent from any country). One of the members of the older Canadian delegation took exception to Canada Youth Delegation coordinator Aiden Abram’s comments in the Canadian Press that it was up the youth to press for a breakthrough in Bali because young people would be stuck dealing with the consequences while most of the negotiators would not even be around in 20 years. As a point of clarity, nobody in Canada’s delegation is over 60, with the oldest clocked in at 57 years of age.
-Forests: Almost everyone it seems, including Canada, is in favour of including forests as an integral part of post-2012 climate agreement. This is good news as deforestation is responsible for 20 per cent of human-caused greenhouse gas emissions, more than the entire global transport sector. Two important things to nail down first are measuring how much carbon is stored in forests (and peatlands!) and how to safeguard that a preserved tree not cut down today will not be cut down tomorrow.
-Yvo de Boer: The UN climate chief took a breather between puffs on his smoke break to chat with Corporate Knight May Jeong for almost ten minutes.
-The US Ghost of Christmas Future: According to Alden Meyer of the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), the US-climate solution train is about to arrive at the station, no later than early 2009, when the new President is inaugurated. As Churchill said, “the Americans can always be counted upon to do the right thing--after they’ve exhausted all other possibilities.” Meyer also drew inspiration for a sea change in US attitudes from Exxon Mobil, which he classified as an “indicator species” for being willing to come to the table with the UCS to discuss climate change regulations design. I was personally more convinced by the Sports Illustrated cover story on climate change, with the picture of the New York Yankee being flooded.
Who’s not?
-Lichtenstein: For being the only holdout industrialized country keeping company with the US in not ratifying the Kyoto Protocol.
-Japan: Japan won an unprecedented three Fossil of the Day awards Tuesday for proposing to shelve the Kyoto Protocol for a new agreement, without making mention of absolute emissions reductions targets. In Japan’s defense, they are on record calling for 50 per cent global emissions reductions by 2050, albeit from a base year of 2005, which is much less difficult to do than a base year of 1990 (interestingly, a lot of the current Canadian government’s modeling has been based on using 2005 as a base year).
-Alden Meyer, Union of Concerned Scientists, commenting on Yvo de Boer’s suggestion that Bali is the first date on the road to a comprehensive climate compact.
Worst Quote: “We were humiliated and our ancestors were bullied.”
-China’s spontaneous outburst during morning plenary squabbles over whether technology transfer should be a separate agenda item or not. This discussion lasted for the better part of the day, as the icebergs slowly melt away. Later in the evening, the parties to the conference came around to China and the G-77’s view that technology transfer should be a separate agenda item.
Term of the Day: Conservation refugee (A person who is made homeless or prevented from sustaining their livelihood because a forest they depend upon (for firewood, building materials, ect.) is made into a conservation zone and put off limits to them.
Who’s hot?
-Canada: The day didn’t start out so well for Canada. The morning press conference by Climate Action Network singled out Canada as part of an evil band of countries trying to derail the Bali talks, by infuriating China and India with calls for them to agree to emissions caps. I asked Stephen Guilbeault of Equiterre what was so bad about requiring fast-industrializing countries like China and India to bend down their emissions curves, given that that China’s business as usual emissions growth alone would put it on track to be emitting twice the total greenhouse gas emissions as the next 26 nations combined in the next 25 years, thus ensuring that global temperatures exceed 2 degrees Celsius increase regardless of what the industrialized world does. Guilbeault’s answer was that Canada is not being sincere. On one hand, Minister Baird tells the House of Commons that a temperature increase of 2 degrees is unacceptable and will bring severe hardship, on the other Canada is abandoning its modest Kyoto obligations. “So,” Guilbeault asked, “are these guys serious or are they just wasting our time?”
In the afternoon, despite being shamed with a Fossil of the Day Award by the Climate Action Network on Monday (and Tuesday), Canada’s lead negotiator showed up to a Climate Action Network side event on what a post-2012 framework should look like. He stuck around for most of the two hours, but I felt a little bad when he asked what the civil society groups were expecting to happen in Bali, and nobody really answered his question. First, he gets a lump of coal for during the wrong thing, and when he asks what is the right thing, no answer is forthcoming.
Canada’s delegation also met with the Youth Delegation (which at 32 members is the largest youth contingent from any country). One of the members of the older Canadian delegation took exception to Canada Youth Delegation coordinator Aiden Abram’s comments in the Canadian Press that it was up the youth to press for a breakthrough in Bali because young people would be stuck dealing with the consequences while most of the negotiators would not even be around in 20 years. As a point of clarity, nobody in Canada’s delegation is over 60, with the oldest clocked in at 57 years of age.
-Forests: Almost everyone it seems, including Canada, is in favour of including forests as an integral part of post-2012 climate agreement. This is good news as deforestation is responsible for 20 per cent of human-caused greenhouse gas emissions, more than the entire global transport sector. Two important things to nail down first are measuring how much carbon is stored in forests (and peatlands!) and how to safeguard that a preserved tree not cut down today will not be cut down tomorrow.
-Yvo de Boer: The UN climate chief took a breather between puffs on his smoke break to chat with Corporate Knight May Jeong for almost ten minutes.
-The US Ghost of Christmas Future: According to Alden Meyer of the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), the US-climate solution train is about to arrive at the station, no later than early 2009, when the new President is inaugurated. As Churchill said, “the Americans can always be counted upon to do the right thing--after they’ve exhausted all other possibilities.” Meyer also drew inspiration for a sea change in US attitudes from Exxon Mobil, which he classified as an “indicator species” for being willing to come to the table with the UCS to discuss climate change regulations design. I was personally more convinced by the Sports Illustrated cover story on climate change, with the picture of the New York Yankee being flooded.
Who’s not?
-Lichtenstein: For being the only holdout industrialized country keeping company with the US in not ratifying the Kyoto Protocol.
-Japan: Japan won an unprecedented three Fossil of the Day awards Tuesday for proposing to shelve the Kyoto Protocol for a new agreement, without making mention of absolute emissions reductions targets. In Japan’s defense, they are on record calling for 50 per cent global emissions reductions by 2050, albeit from a base year of 2005, which is much less difficult to do than a base year of 1990 (interestingly, a lot of the current Canadian government’s modeling has been based on using 2005 as a base year).
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
A shirt for the Saudis?
Who’s Hot?
Australia: The definite highlight of the day occurred during the opening plenary when Australia announced it would ratify the Kyoto Protocol. The roomful of mostly jaded bureaucrats broke into a spontaneous outburst of intense applause unlike what I thought them capable. I think someone may have even hooted. This could bode well for the climate talks as it suggests that the bureaucrats have a heart.
Who’s Not?
The three Fossil Award winners of the day were in order:
1. Saudi Arabia: I felt it was slightly unfair for Saudi Arabia to get the number one Fossil Award for the first day as they were the only party to make a joke in their opening statement, commenting that they thought the UNFCCC policy of open neck shirts meant that they would be getting a nice new Indonesian batik shirt—but apparently only the UN climate chief Yvo de Boer (who was wearing his) got one. About five minutes after this Yvo came into the room and whispered something to the Saudi delegation. I asked them if Yvo was going to get them a shirt. The Saudi representative said “no, but he should.” Later in the afternoon, the Saudis were the only country to raise a red flag about giving a mandate to a contact group to seek out common solutions, citing that it was impossible for a consensus between developing and developed countries to be reached on the matter of commitments. Maybe Yvo should have given them a shirt after all.
2. US for being the only industrialized country not to ratify Kyoto. Enough said.
3. Canada insisted the all major emitters must be part of obligations in post-2012 agreement paying short shrift to the Orwellian gospel of “common but differentiated responsibility,” which didn’t sound so good, considering Canada has renounced its Kyoto obligations. It was a tough day for Canada, as China appeared to accuse Canada and Japan of trying to “sabotage” a future climate change agreement by talking about the need for large non-industrialized emitters (i.e. China and India) to agree to commitments as well.
China won the award for being the having the most audacity of the day. After calling Japan and Canada saboteurs for even suggesting that countries like China be part of the post-2012 commitments, China proceeded to call for the principle of common but differentiated responsibility to be respected (i.e. no responsibility for them) for developed countries to agree to 25-40 per cent greenhouse gas emission reductions by 2020, while developing countries like China could utilize “policy measures,” and while we’re at it, China said developing countries would need money and lots of it for adaptation and mitigation. Boiled down the Chinese message was: Don’t bugger with us and show me the money.
The Japan-Canada Connection
In the opening plenary, Japan announced that it had submitted a complete 7-point proposal, including mitigation (read: obligations) that would apply to all parties, particularly large emitters. I spoke with the Japanese Ambassador for Global Environment Kyoji Komachi right before his speech. As I was entering his number into my blackberry, I bragged that it was Canadian technology. This prompted him to pull out his Sharp PDA that had real-time TV and a built-in translator. So much for Canadian technology. Right after Japan, Canada was up next, and although our technology may be lagging, our support for Japan’s proposal was not. Canada unreservedly supported Japan’s proposal, which has not yet been made public. Canada also made the point that even if all countries that presently have Kyoto commitments were to take their emission to zero, it would not be enough (with the growth in developing countries) to avoid increasing average global temperatures by less than 2 degrees Celsius, widely considered to be the threshold where climate change gets dangerous.
Australia: The definite highlight of the day occurred during the opening plenary when Australia announced it would ratify the Kyoto Protocol. The roomful of mostly jaded bureaucrats broke into a spontaneous outburst of intense applause unlike what I thought them capable. I think someone may have even hooted. This could bode well for the climate talks as it suggests that the bureaucrats have a heart.
Who’s Not?
The three Fossil Award winners of the day were in order:
1. Saudi Arabia: I felt it was slightly unfair for Saudi Arabia to get the number one Fossil Award for the first day as they were the only party to make a joke in their opening statement, commenting that they thought the UNFCCC policy of open neck shirts meant that they would be getting a nice new Indonesian batik shirt—but apparently only the UN climate chief Yvo de Boer (who was wearing his) got one. About five minutes after this Yvo came into the room and whispered something to the Saudi delegation. I asked them if Yvo was going to get them a shirt. The Saudi representative said “no, but he should.” Later in the afternoon, the Saudis were the only country to raise a red flag about giving a mandate to a contact group to seek out common solutions, citing that it was impossible for a consensus between developing and developed countries to be reached on the matter of commitments. Maybe Yvo should have given them a shirt after all.
2. US for being the only industrialized country not to ratify Kyoto. Enough said.
3. Canada insisted the all major emitters must be part of obligations in post-2012 agreement paying short shrift to the Orwellian gospel of “common but differentiated responsibility,” which didn’t sound so good, considering Canada has renounced its Kyoto obligations. It was a tough day for Canada, as China appeared to accuse Canada and Japan of trying to “sabotage” a future climate change agreement by talking about the need for large non-industrialized emitters (i.e. China and India) to agree to commitments as well.
China won the award for being the having the most audacity of the day. After calling Japan and Canada saboteurs for even suggesting that countries like China be part of the post-2012 commitments, China proceeded to call for the principle of common but differentiated responsibility to be respected (i.e. no responsibility for them) for developed countries to agree to 25-40 per cent greenhouse gas emission reductions by 2020, while developing countries like China could utilize “policy measures,” and while we’re at it, China said developing countries would need money and lots of it for adaptation and mitigation. Boiled down the Chinese message was: Don’t bugger with us and show me the money.
The Japan-Canada Connection
In the opening plenary, Japan announced that it had submitted a complete 7-point proposal, including mitigation (read: obligations) that would apply to all parties, particularly large emitters. I spoke with the Japanese Ambassador for Global Environment Kyoji Komachi right before his speech. As I was entering his number into my blackberry, I bragged that it was Canadian technology. This prompted him to pull out his Sharp PDA that had real-time TV and a built-in translator. So much for Canadian technology. Right after Japan, Canada was up next, and although our technology may be lagging, our support for Japan’s proposal was not. Canada unreservedly supported Japan’s proposal, which has not yet been made public. Canada also made the point that even if all countries that presently have Kyoto commitments were to take their emission to zero, it would not be enough (with the growth in developing countries) to avoid increasing average global temperatures by less than 2 degrees Celsius, widely considered to be the threshold where climate change gets dangerous.
Welcome to the Island of Gods.
Best quotes this morning:
“I hope the Bali warm weather will help this conference bring a fruitful outcome."
-Bali Governor welcoming delegates to Island of Gods
"Bali is one of the most beautiful places on the planet, but it is in danger of becoming a lost paradise. The outcome of this conference will determine whether Bali and other Island countries become lost paradises."
-Yvo de Boer, UNFCCC Chief
The formal plenary launch of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change talks kicked off this morning. I stumbled upon the Canada delegation when I came in the main hall. They were among the minority that were wearing shirt and ties, but as the Cameroon delegation didn’t have anybody sitting beside them, they had extra room to air out. David McGovern from the delegation told me that Canada would be sending officials instead of Ministers to the Trade and Finance ministers’ meetings taking place in Bali December 8-11. He said a forty-hour return flight was a long way to come for a day and half meeting. When I told him I was surprised that US Trade Representative Susan Schwab was attending, he said, “We were too.”
The incoming President of the Conference, Indonesian Environment Minister Rachmat Witoelar notified the delegates that Indonesia would be issuing a special commemorative stamp to mark the conference. He called on delegates to “operationalize the adaptation fund,” meaning that rich need to pump some cash into it. He also called for combating deforestation to form a central element of the future climate agreement. He noted that the major stumbling block to take action on climate change was the perception that it would create economic hardship. While the costs are substantial, he said, they are affordable, and the costs of doing nothing will be far more severe than we can afford.
Yvo de Boer followed up noting what an incredible year 2007 has been for the acceptance of climate change as a major threat:
* EU has adopted GHG reduction targets of 20-30 per cent by 2020
* China and other developing countries have adapted national climate change plans
* The US initiated meetings to reach agreement by the end of 2008 on how the UNFCCC can proceed post-2012
* The UN fourth assessment report galvanized attention at the urgency of the problem and won the Nobel Prize
* 80 heads of state gathered for high level meeting this September by the Un Secretary General called for a breakthrough in Bali.
Yvo also emphasized that nobody can hide from climate change, all will be affected, and the poorest of the poor will be affected the most.
He made what seemed to me to be a slightly contradictory entreaty to respect “common but differentiated responsibility,” while requiring obligation from all. Most of the developing world understands “common but differentiated responsibility” to mean that they don’t have to take on any of the heavy lifting for climate change.
Yvo also said that the challenge of combating climate change was daunting, and would require “squaring the circle of conflicting interests,” which he said could be done by attending to four corners of climate policy:
1. Action requires a new low-carbon energy future underpinning economic growth.
2. Bold action in the North can fuel clean growth in the South.
3. Fossil fuels are here to stay we figure out ways to use them more cleanly, or we will be cutting our noses to spite our face.
4. Adaptation is a reality for all countries but unlike Yvo’s home country of the Netherlands which can afford to pay the adaptation bill, many countries cannot and will require financial assistance.
In closing, Yvo explained the meetings emphasis on tools rather than outcomes as akin to marriage, which is the culmination of much courting not the topic of discussion on the first date. Most people laughed (the only time during the opening plenary) but I thought we were further along (as in at least second base) than the first date.
“I hope the Bali warm weather will help this conference bring a fruitful outcome."
-Bali Governor welcoming delegates to Island of Gods
"Bali is one of the most beautiful places on the planet, but it is in danger of becoming a lost paradise. The outcome of this conference will determine whether Bali and other Island countries become lost paradises."
-Yvo de Boer, UNFCCC Chief
The formal plenary launch of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change talks kicked off this morning. I stumbled upon the Canada delegation when I came in the main hall. They were among the minority that were wearing shirt and ties, but as the Cameroon delegation didn’t have anybody sitting beside them, they had extra room to air out. David McGovern from the delegation told me that Canada would be sending officials instead of Ministers to the Trade and Finance ministers’ meetings taking place in Bali December 8-11. He said a forty-hour return flight was a long way to come for a day and half meeting. When I told him I was surprised that US Trade Representative Susan Schwab was attending, he said, “We were too.”
The incoming President of the Conference, Indonesian Environment Minister Rachmat Witoelar notified the delegates that Indonesia would be issuing a special commemorative stamp to mark the conference. He called on delegates to “operationalize the adaptation fund,” meaning that rich need to pump some cash into it. He also called for combating deforestation to form a central element of the future climate agreement. He noted that the major stumbling block to take action on climate change was the perception that it would create economic hardship. While the costs are substantial, he said, they are affordable, and the costs of doing nothing will be far more severe than we can afford.
Yvo de Boer followed up noting what an incredible year 2007 has been for the acceptance of climate change as a major threat:
* EU has adopted GHG reduction targets of 20-30 per cent by 2020
* China and other developing countries have adapted national climate change plans
* The US initiated meetings to reach agreement by the end of 2008 on how the UNFCCC can proceed post-2012
* The UN fourth assessment report galvanized attention at the urgency of the problem and won the Nobel Prize
* 80 heads of state gathered for high level meeting this September by the Un Secretary General called for a breakthrough in Bali.
Yvo also emphasized that nobody can hide from climate change, all will be affected, and the poorest of the poor will be affected the most.
He made what seemed to me to be a slightly contradictory entreaty to respect “common but differentiated responsibility,” while requiring obligation from all. Most of the developing world understands “common but differentiated responsibility” to mean that they don’t have to take on any of the heavy lifting for climate change.
Yvo also said that the challenge of combating climate change was daunting, and would require “squaring the circle of conflicting interests,” which he said could be done by attending to four corners of climate policy:
1. Action requires a new low-carbon energy future underpinning economic growth.
2. Bold action in the North can fuel clean growth in the South.
3. Fossil fuels are here to stay we figure out ways to use them more cleanly, or we will be cutting our noses to spite our face.
4. Adaptation is a reality for all countries but unlike Yvo’s home country of the Netherlands which can afford to pay the adaptation bill, many countries cannot and will require financial assistance.
In closing, Yvo explained the meetings emphasis on tools rather than outcomes as akin to marriage, which is the culmination of much courting not the topic of discussion on the first date. Most people laughed (the only time during the opening plenary) but I thought we were further along (as in at least second base) than the first date.
It's getting hot in here: Bali day 1.
Challenges of the Day: The goal for the international community should be to find ways to move away the International Energy Scenario where global emissions go up by 50 per cent by 2050 and toward the IPCC scenarios where emissions go down by 50 per cent by 2050.-Yvo de Boer, UNFCCC Chief
“If we give nothing, we get nothing. We need to figure out what little can we give to maximize our return. Right now, we have no plan. The other side has lawyers, economists and a plan. We need one too.”
-Papua New Guinea
Who’s Hot:
* Indonesia (literally—it’s a humid 29 degrees Celsius here)
* Yvo de Boer and low A/C Policy: The UNFCCC climate chief was sporting a stylish batik Indonesian shirt which his assistant said he brought with him; he hasn’t had a chance to go shopping. The UNFCC has amended the dress code to exclude formal wear and ties to “allow participants to conduct discussions in a more comfortable environment, as well as limit the use of air conditioning and thereby reduce greenhouse gas emissions.”
* HRH Prince Charles: Made the following call to action, “Let us all join them by stiffening the sinews and summoning up the blood to overcome this unprecedented [global warming] challenge.”
* Myanmar: For challenging G-77 + China to open up and be more transparent with the press.
* Papua New Guinea: For challenging G-77 + China to come up with a plan and be willing to make sacrifices to get benefits in the form of adaptation funds and for preserving forests.
* Australia’s PM Kevin Rudd, who will attend meeting and for being the first head of state to defeat a sitting head of government by taking leadership role on fighting global warming. His new cabinet includes a Minister of Climate Change and Water.
* UNDP Human Development lead author Report Kevin Watkins: For having the courage to admit that the current cap-and-trade approach is not producing results and that a global carbon tax should be considered, “Long-term investment needs predictability of price, and a tax is the way to do that. Cap-and-trade is not particularly working. We need to develop the strategy into a carbon tax.”
Who’s Not:
* Global economy: For scuttling the cold war global cooling dividend. After the economic implosion the former Soviet Union in the early nineties, global emissions in 2005 finally climbed back to a level greater they were in 1990.
* USA: According to Yvo De Boer, the US will not likely accept binding targets even under a new President, because the Senate is opposed unless China is involved as well.
Bali, the Indonesian island of the Gods, kicked off global climate change talks today meant to draw out a roadmap and policy toolkit for a global warming agreement in time for a smooth transition when the first Kyoto period expires at the end of 2012. Over 12,000 of the globe’s leading climate power-brokers (including some people with some real sway like the Trade and Finance officials for the first time ever) from 187 countries are gathering in beautiful Bali, including a cohort of 1500 accredited journalists to keep tabs, or at least run them up on the Bali cocktails, as we struggle to meet filing deadlines accentuated by a 13-hour time difference from EST.
Two things struck me about Bali right away. First, with sweltering temperatures of 29-plus degrees Celsius it is much more amiable climate to focus the mind on doing battle against global warming. At least compared to Montreal. When Canada--with Stephane Dion presiding over the talks as meeting President--hosted the UN’s global climate change meeting in December, 2005, I remember standing outside the Palais des congrès at a rally where Elizabeth May (Sierra Club Executive Director at the Time) was challenging world leaders to demonstrate the political will required to avoid dangerous global warming. People were waving placards all around that had a url at the bottom that read itsgettinghotinhere.org, and it was so cold I could not even feel my toes.
The other thing I learnt is that Bali is pretty big, so if you are planning on covering the climate change conference at the Nusa Dua resort’s Weston Hotel, and you got a great deal on a villa in the Uban district of Bali, you better be prepared for a 4-hour round-trip commute daily on your scooter, which is the preferred mode of transport among the Balinese, who despite the traffic density are surprisingly courteous drivers who could teach a thing or two to horn-happy New Yorkers.
Two official things of note happened on the first day of the two-week long climate talks: the closed door first meeting of G-77 plus China group in the Sunflower room, which is actually a big white tent, and UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) chief Yvo de Boer’s press briefings to outline the goals of the conference.
I decided to implausibly feign interpretation of “closed door” to mean that the door would be closed to ensure that the air conditioners did not have to work overtime, in the spirit of energy efficiency.
Despite my white shirt and skin colour, I attempted to conspicuously blend in with the Bengali delegation. I realized that I must be sitting next to someone of importance as a person kept fetching water for him. He later introduced himself as the acting head of mission for Bangladesh. I told that my father was a city councilor for an area in Toronto, in which Bengalis comprised the largest ethnic group, and we instantaneously struck up a rapport. He told me that he supports a global carbon levy, with a portion being directed to developing countries to finance the preservation of forests and adapt to climate change, with the WTO playing a role.
The delegates seemed torn on whether to support “future commitments” or “global action” for post-2012, after the first phase of Kyoto expires. South Africa said, “we are facing a global challenge and global approaches are needed.”
Algeria said we can agree to global action, as long as we’re clear that global action doesn’t mean commitment.
India, which along with China, were the two countries that were in the room that really matter from an emissions point of view, said “we have to be extremely careful about the unintended consequences of agreeing to global action or commitments. 50 per cent by 2050? What does that mean?”
Papua New Guinea made one of the shortest and most pointed speeches, calling for a reality check: “If we give nothing, we get nothing. We need to figure out what little can we give to maximize our return. Right now, we have no plan. The other side has lawyers, economists and a plan. We need one too.”
Myanmar, that not-so-likely bastion of press freedom and transparency, stood up to suggest that the G-77 needs to be more transparent with the media and that the G-77 spokespeople should do media briefings so that the G-77 do not get such a poor shake in the news as has been the case on climate change.
There was a general consensus in the room for the rich countries need to pony up some serious funds for adaptation rather than the symbolic amount (US $36 million) presently flowing.
Near the end of the meeting, someone whispered in the Chair’s ear. I swore he was looking at me when he said, “I would like to take this opportunity to remind everyone that this is a closed-door meeting for G77 plus China. So if you are not a representative from a member country, I would ask that you please vacate the premises.” In case the intruders didn’t hear, the Chair, added, “I would also like to ask all of the delegates to assist in identifying any non-representatives in the room in finding their way to a more convenient location. I took this as my cue and waved bye to my new Bengali friend before discreetly exiting out the back of the tent.
The other main meeting was Yvo de Boer’s press briefings. The main thrust of this meeting according to Yvo, who was clad in a climate-friendly (comfortable open necked shirts require less A/C than with a suit and tie) Indonesian Batik shirt, is to decide on a toolbox for how we can take on global warming. This toolbox, in Yvo’s view, will almost certainly include a carbon market (presently carbon trading is at US $30 billion/year), but could also include carbon taxes, sectoral targets, and product standards (favoured by the US, but not necessarily to the exclusion of other tools).
The Reuters correspondent asked if there wouldn’t be a bland result from focusing on the toolbox as opposed to firm GHG targets. Yvo used the metaphor of a marathon, saying that the Reuters reporter would not want to predict his marathon time (which Yvo guessed would be in around six hours—a bit unoptimistic as the Reuters guy looked pretty fit) until he knew if he would be allowed to wear shoes and what kind of surface he would be running on (sand vs. asphalt). The main reason, according to Yvo, for why we need a toolbox before we agree on targets (or maybe just one global target) is that countries’ ambition to adopt targets is a direct function of what tools they have at their disposal to meet those targets. Yvo cited his home country of the Netherlands as being able to take on targets that were twice as stringent as they otherwise would have because they had the option of purchasing international credits to meet halve of their obligation. The idea here is that if tools allow countries to get a bargain price on carbon credits, then countries will be apt to agree to stricter reductions. Sometimes though, I think, you get what you pay for and bargain hunting may fall short of scaling global efforts up to the annual trillion dollar scale the IPCC says is necessary to avoid dangerous human interference with the climate.
Yvo also said that it will be possible for the group of industrialized countries (which I assume included Canada) to meet their commitments under the Kyoto Protocol. I wonder if he and Stephen Harper--who is being sued by Friends of the Earth Canada and ecojustice for explicitly saying Canada will not meet nor is it realistic for Canada to meet its Kyoto targets--have talked recently.
Yvo also singled out adaptation as a top priority of the meeting. Presently, there is a two per cent levy on all Clean-Development Mechanism (CDM) projects that is set aside for helping countries adapt to climate change. To date, $36 million has been dispensed, but Yvo said that the current pipeline of CDM projects could result in $1.6 billion for adaptation funds, without specifying the time period. Yvo did say that this amount of money would still pale in comparison to the funds needed to help countries adapt, offering that a significant chunk of funds would also need to be leveraged from the private sector. Yvo predicted that adaptation funding, if done near a scale which is necessary, would dwarf overseas development assistance. Yvo identified another big focus going forward as providing funds for preserving forests, as deforestation contributes 20 per cent of human-caused greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere. To do this, he outlined the need to get trial projects going that could delineate exactly how much carbon trees save, and how to ensure the safeguards for preserved trees so they are not cut down at a future date.
Emil Salim, the head of the host Indonesian delegation, summed up the goal of the Bali climate talks with his own metaphor: "We hope this meeting will be like an engagement, where everyone agrees to get together, next year's conference in Poland will be the marriage and in Copenhagen the child will be born."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
