Ban Ki-moon: As people, as nations, as a species: we sink or swim together
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon urges the world's leaders to seize the opportunities that history is giving them, "so that tomorrows generations can look back and say: Our leaders rose to the challenge. They did what was right."
Rie Jerichow 04/10/2009 16:40
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon set a cautiously optimistic tone when he gave a lecture at the University of Copenhagen Saturday.
He referred to the Climate Change Summit at the United Nations less than two weeks ago, when leaders from all over the world signaled their determination to seal a comprehensive, fair and effective deal at Copenhagen.
"What I sense from the Summit is that finally, we are seeing a thaw in some of the frozen positions that have prevented governments from making progress in the negotiations…. this was a crucial step forward on the road to Copenhagen – and not a moment too soon," Ban Ki-moon said.
The UN Secretary-General listed four benchmarks for a successful climate deal at Copenhagen and beyond:
First, a successful deal must involve all countries. Second, a successful deal must provide comprehensive support to the most vulnerable. Third, a deal needs to be backed by money and the means to deliver it, and fourth, a deal must include an equitable global governance structure that addresses the needs of developing countries.
In Bangkok the UN-sponsored climate talks continue. The Secretary-General urged governments to table concrete proposals.
"We are not there yet. There is still a lot of work to be done, and not much time to do it." he said, inciting world leaders to seize the opportunities that history is giving us, "so that tomorrow's generations can look back and say: Our leaders rose to the challenge. They did what was right."
"We share one planet, one small blue speck in space. As people, as nations, as a species: we sink or swim together," Ban Ki-moon concluded.
Q&A: The Copenhagen climate summit
In December, delegations from 192 countries will hold two weeks of talks in Copenhagen aimed at establishing a new global treaty on climate change. Here, BBC environment correspondent Richard Black looks at what the talks are about and what they are supposed to achieve.
Why are the Copenhagen talks happening?
The majority of the world's governments believe that climate change poses a threat to human society and to the natural world.
Successive scientific reports, notably those from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), have come to ever firmer conclusions about humankind's influence on the modern-day climate, and about the impacts of rising temperatures.
Two years ago, at the UN climate talks held in Bali, governments agreed to start work on a new global agreement.
The Copenhagen talks mark the end of that two-year period.
Governments hope to leave the Danish capital having completed the new deal.
The talks are technically known as the 15th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) - often abbreviated to COP15.
Why is climate change happening - and is it the same as global warming?
The Earth's climate has always changed naturally over time.
For example, variability in our planet's orbit alters its distance from the Sun, which has given rise to major Ice Ages and intervening warmer periods.
According to the last IPCC report, it is more than 90% probable that humankind is largely responsible for modern-day climate change.
The principal cause is burning fossil fuels - coal, oil and gas.
This produces carbon dioxide (CO2), which - added to the CO2 present naturally in the Earth's atmosphere - acts as a kind of blanket, trapping more of the Sun's energy and warming the Earth's surface.
Deforestation and processes that release other greenhouse gases such as methane also contribute.
Although the initial impact is a rise in average temperatures around the world - "global warming" - this also produces changes in rainfall patterns, rising sea levels, changes to the difference in temperatures between night and day, and so on.
This more complex set of disturbances has acquired the label "climate change" - sometimes more accurately called "anthropogenic (human-made) climate change".
Why is a new treaty needed?
The Copenhagen talks sit within the framework of the UNFCCC, established at the Rio de Janeiro Earth Summit in 1992.
Denmark's Environment Minister Connie Hedegaard will chair COP15
In 1997, the UNFCCC spawned the Kyoto Protocol.
But neither of these agreements can curb the growth in greenhouse gas emissions sufficiently to avoid the climate impacts projected by the IPCC.
In particular, the Kyoto Protocol's targets for reducing emissions apply only to a small set of countries and expire in 2012.
Governments want a new treaty that is bigger, bolder, wider-ranging and more sophisticated than the Kyoto agreement.
In June, the G8 and a number of large developing countries agreed that the average temperature rise since pre-industrial times should be limited to 2C (3.6F).
In principle, they are looking to the Copenhagen treaty to curb the growth in greenhouse gas emissions enough to keep the world within that limit.
Who is looking for what in the new treaty?
A lot of issues are involved.
Industrialised nations will set targets for reducing their greenhouse gas emissions in order to mitigate climate change.
The key date for these commitments is 2020, although some countries are looking beyond that, to 2050.
Australia, the EU, Japan and New Zealand have already said what they are prepared to do by 2020.
Richer developing countries are also likely to be asked to constrain their emissions.
If they do make any pledges, they are likely to restrain the growth of emissions rather than making actual cuts.
Their commitments are likely to be expressed in terms of a reduction in emissions growth of a certain percentage compared with "business as usual".
In order to help developing countries constrain their greenhouse gas emissions, industrialised nations have agreed in principle to help them in areas such as renewable energy.
Funding clean technologies will be part of any deal
Developing countries are looking for mechanisms that can speed up this technology transfer.
Many countries are thinking about how to prepare for the impacts of climate change - what sorts of adaptation will be necessary.
These include measures such as building sea defences, securing fresh water supplies and developing new crop varieties.
Developing countries are looking for substantial and reliable finance to help them adapt. Their argument is that as the industrialised world has caused the problem, it must pay to sort it out.
Measures to protect forests will be a component of the deal.
How much will it cost?
In general, fossil fuels provide us with our cheapest sources of energy.
The main route to reducing greenhouse gas emissions is to avoid burning fossil fuels; so a successful treaty would almost certainly make energy more expensive.
There are many different analyses of how much it would cost to make this transition quickly enough to avert "dangerous" climate change.
Developing countries are looking for money in the order of hundreds of billions of dollars each year for mitigation.
A number of studies also suggest that a further $100bn per year or thereabouts will be needed to help poorer countries adapt.
By comparison, the amount of overseas aid currently given each year by rich countries is in the region of $100bn.
What are the prospects for a deal?
Four broad outcomes are possible from the Copenhagen summit:
• a comprehensive deal with all loose ends tied up
• a deal agreeing the "big picture", but with lots of details remaining to be thrashed out over the coming months or years
• adjournment of the COP, probably until midway through 2010
• breakdown.
Almost every government attending the talks wants a deal, and they want it soon, in order that all the essential ingredients are agreed by the time the Kyoto Protocol's targets expire in 2012.
But many details remain to be worked out; and as any treaty must be agreed by consensus, there is lots of potential for disagreement, and any single country can derail negotiations.
Would a Copenhagen deal solve climate change?
The global average temperature has already risen by about 0.7C since pre-industrial times.
In some parts of the world this is already having impacts - and a Copenhagen deal could not stop those impacts, although it could provide funding to help deal with some of the consequences.
Greenhouse gases such as CO2 stay in the atmosphere for decades; and concentrations are already high enough that further warming is almost inevitable.
Many analyses suggest an average rise of 1.5C since pre-industrial times is guaranteed.
A strong Copenhagen deal might keep the temperature rise under 2C; but given uncertainties in how the atmosphere and oceans respond to rising concentrations of greenhouse gases, it might not.
This is why developing countries put such an emphasis on adaptation, which they argue is necessary already.
IPCC figures suggest that to have a reasonable chance of avoiding 2C, global emissions would need to peak and start to decline within about 15-20 years.
Currently, the cuts pledged by industrialised nations are not enough to halt the overall global rise in emissions.
Whatever happens in Copenhagen, further meetings will almost certainly be necessary to finalise the "rules" of any new treaty.
Further ahead, at some point governments will almost certainly begin the process of securing the deal after Copenhagen.
Carbon
+1 1 vote
FACTBOX - How to judge success, failure at UN climate talks
by Reuters News on 14 October 2009, 13:15 PM 1 comment , 37 views
Categories: Reuters News, Factboxes
Oct 14 (Reuters) - Talks on a new U.N. climate deal are bogged down before a Dec. 7-18 meeting of 190 nations in Copenhagen -- the following lays out how to judge success or failure.
Most clearly, the U.N. Climate Change Secretariat lists four "political essentials" for a successful new pact, with many details to be filled in later:
1) DEVELOPED COUNTRIES
-- "Ambitious emission reduction targets" for rich nations.
Scientists in the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said in 2007 that developed nations would have to cut emissions by between 25 and 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2020 to avert the worst of climate change. So far, promises average 11 to 15 percent below 1990 levels.
"Pledges for mid-term targets by industrialised countries fall woefully short of the IPCC range," the Secretariat says.
The United States, the number two emitter behind China, may not agree carbon laws by December. That may make it hard for Washington to give a firm pledge at Copenhagen.
2) DEVELOPING NATIONS
-- "Nationally appropriate mitigation actions" by developing nations to slow the rise of their greenhouse gas emissions.
Such actions, slowing the rise of emissions rather than demanding absolute cuts, could be more use of renewable energy such as wind or solar power, more efficient coal-burning power plants or better building insulation to save energy.
3) CASH AND TECHNOLOGY
-- "An essential part of a comprehensive deal at Copenhagen is identifying how to generate new, additional and predictable financial resources and technology", the Secretariat says.
It says cash needed both to curb emissions and help people adapt to changes such as droughts or floods could total up to $250 billion per year in 2020. The Secretariat wants developed nations to come up with at least $10 billion in Copenhagen to kick-start a deal, with details of longer-term funds to aid developing countries worked out later.
4) INSTITUTIONS
-- "An effective institutional framework with governance structures that address the needs of developing countries".
Copenhagen needs to work out the nuts and bolts of how to share out new funds and technologies to developing nations and ensure a transparent system to make their use "measurable, reportable and verifiable". It says that developing countries have to be "equal decision-making partners".
----
OTHER RECENT VIEWS
* Jairam Ramesh, India's minister of state for environment, cautioned on Oct. 10 against "exaggerated expectations" for Copenhagen.
He said talks should be cut to focus on three areas -- finance for adaptation to climate change, a deal to combat deforestation and promote forestation, and technology sharing. Countries might need to come back to Copenhagen after December.
Many experts say governments only made concessions to agree the U.N.'s existing Kyoto Protocol at the last minute in 1997.
* "There is no plan B," Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva told climate negotiators in Bangkok on Sept. 28. "If we do not realise plan A, we go straight to plan F, which stands for failure."
---------
DEADLINES?
About 190 nations pledged in Bali in December 2007 to agree a new U.N. deal within two years after scientists said action was urgently needed to avert desertification, flooding, heatwaves and rising sea levels.
The first period of the U.N's Kyoto Protocol, which binds industrialised nations except the United States to cut emissions, runs out at the end of 2012. The idea is that a deal in 2009 gives good time for all parliaments to ratify a deal.
Recession is doing part of the job already -- world carbon dioxide emissions are set to fall 2.6 percent this year because of a fall in industrial activity.
(Editing by Philippa Fletcher) ((alister.doyle@thomsonreuters.com; +47 900 87 663; Reuters Messaging: rm://alister.doyle.reuters.com@reuters.net))
Keywords: CLIMATE/OUTCOME
Contact author
Carbon
+1 1 vote
ANALYSIS-U.N. climate talks may need extra time in 2010
by Reuters News on 15 October 2009, 14:59 PM 0 comments , 46 views
Categories: Analysis, Reuters News
* Copenhagen climate talks may need "extra time" in 2010
* Lack of U.S. legislation could have knock-on impact
By Alister Doyle, Environment Correspondent
OSLO, Oct 15 (Reuters) - World climate talks may need extra time next year to agree cuts in greenhouse emissions for 2020 since U.S. laws are unlikely to be in place before a U.N. meeting in Copenhagen in December, experts say.
A deal from the 190-nation Dec. 7-18 talks may focus on finance to help developing nations confront global warming, technology and institutions. But a key goal of fixing country by country targets for the rich to curb emissions by 2020 may slip.
"There may have to be extra time," said Nick Mabey, of the E3G think-tank in London, suggesting April 2010 as a deadline for a deal.
"You can do the details of institutions after that but not the fundamental deal, or it will start looking like Doha," he said, referring to slow-moving trade talks. "You can have extra time only if the crowd is still in the stadium."
A carbon-capping bill before the U.S. Senate is likely to clear some committees, but not the full Senate, this year, experts say. After it clears the Senate, it has to be reconciled with a House bill passed in June before it can be law.
A lack of clear U.S. numbers could have a knock-on effect.
Many other nations are reluctant to step up their ambitions in Copenhagen unless the United States, the biggest emitter behind China and the only developed nation outside the Kyoto Protocol for limiting emissions to 2012, signs up.
"A final agreement doesn't appear in reach for Copenhagen but a solid agreement on the basic framework would be a huge step forward," said Elliot Diringer of the Pew Center on Global Climate Change.
AMBITIOUS
He said Copenhagen could still set "ambitious" goals such as a global goal of halving emissions by 2050 and an aggregate 2020 target for developed nations' cuts. But more months of work were likely to be needed to agree national 2020 goals.
Diplomats say there are preparations for extra U.N. climate meetings in 2010 beyond a main meeting in Mexico in December and a mid-year session in Bonn. Those meetings are likely to be needed no matter what the outcome of Copenhagen.
U.S. negotiator Jonathan Pershing said at U.N. climate talks in Bangkok last week that it would be "extraordinarily difficult" for the United States to commit to a specific number in the absence of action from Congress.
He added: "That doesn't mean that a deal is not possible."
Other nations say Washington has to name numbers.
"We need a number from the United States at the Copenhagen talks. I think that's very important," British Energy and Climate Secretary Ed Miliband said. "You can't have success in Copenhagen without the numbers."
"We are not even considering the possibility" that the United States will be unable to set a national target for 2020, European Commission spokeswoman Barbara Helfferich said.
"What's important is that one way or the other the U.S. comes to Copenhagen ready to do a deal...whatever the stage or status of climate legislation in the Senate," said James Leape, head of the WWF environmental group.
U.S. numbers could unlock cuts by other developed nations and also encourage developing nations, such as India and China, to reduce the growth of their emissions, he said.
So far, 2020 offers of greenhouse gas cuts from developed nations total between 11 and 15 percent below 1990 levels by 2020 [ID:nLE186678]
A U.N. climate panel report in 2007 said that cuts would have to total 25-40 percent to avert the worst of climate change such as more wildfires, sandstorms, extinctions, rising ocean levels and more powerful cyclones.
And most offers are conditional on what others do. The European Union, for instance, has said it will cut unilaterally by 20 percent and by 30 if other nations join in. Australia's 2020 offer ranges from 3 to 23 percent from 1990.
A big problem for President Barack Obama is that the administration of President Bill Clinton agreed in Japan in 1997 to cut U.S. greenhouse gases by seven percent below 1990 levels by 2008-12 as part of the Kyoto Protocol.
Clinton never even submitted the deal to a hostile Senate and President George W. Bush formally dropped Kyoto, saying it unfairly omitted goals for poor nations and would hit jobs.
So Obama's administration is extremely wary of promising more than the Senate delivers.
The proposed U.S. Senate bill offers emissions cuts by 2020 of 20 percent below 2005 levels. That works out at 7 percent below 1990 levels by 2020 -- by coincidence the cut Clinton thought the U.S. could achieve under Kyoto.
((With extra reporting by David Fogarty in Singapore, Gerard Wynn in London))
((For a TAKE A LOOK about the Road to Copenhagen, click on [ID:nLL660624]. For an overview of climate change stories, click [nCLIMATE]))
-- For Reuters latest environment blogs click on: http://blogs.reuters.com/environment/ (Editing by Ralph Boulton) ((alister.doyle@thomsonreuters.com; +47 900 87 663; Reuters Messaging: rm://alister.doyle.reuters.com@reuters.net))
Keywords: CLIMATE/CUTS
Kamis, 15 Oktober 2009
Carbon News Clipping
NEWS
Paradise lost?
Most people know the Maldives as a tropical paradise for holiday makers. But behind the white beaches and glittering waves is a poor population which has lived in close symbiosis with the sea for hundreds of years - but now has to look elsewhere for a place to live, as the ocean is steadily eating away at their islands.
Michael von Bülow 20/03/2009 12:40
When the tsunami hit the archipelago of the Maldives in 2004, it was more in the way of a flooding than a regular tidal wave due to the sharp profile of the atolls. Only 87 people perished, but the damages were catastrophic for the tiny island state.
Two thirds of the country disappeared momentarily into the Indian Ocean, and when the sea withdrew, it took 62 percent of the country’s GNP with it. Electricity, communications and freshwater supplies on many islands were destroyed by the saltwater, and not until two years later was the country brought back on foot with the aid of the UN and international aid organisations.
Perhaps it was only a taste of what the 300,000 citizens of the Maldives can expect if and when global warming kicks in and makes the world’s seas rise by as much as one meter within the next century, like the latest scientific studies forecast.
80 percent of the island state’s only 235 km2 are less than one meter above sea level, so disaster is looming. Erosion is constantly eating away at the vulnerable atolls, and climate change is already palpable in the shape of more rain and more disease-carrying mosquitoes.
To most foreigners the Maldives are just a paradise for holiday makers. White beaches as if taken straight from a postcard and a temperature that due to cooling breezes from the sea never becomes unbearably high, making the country a rare pearl made for sailing, surfing, diving or just lazing on the beach. Under the sea, hobby divers encounter a world of adventures with corals and a thousand different tropical fish species.
Almost 700.000 tourists from mainly Europe, Japan, China and Australia visit the Maldives each year. Upon landing in one of the two international airports, one immediately notices the proximity of the sea. It feels literally like landing on the water because the islands are so tiny – a jogger can easily cover the perimeter of the main island Male’ in less than half an hour. The runways are regularly wet with splashes of sea water, in spite of the fact that the airport island Hulhumale has been raised artificially to the breath-taking elevation of two meters above sea level.
With a share of 35-40 percent of the GNP, tourism is a vital source of income for the Maldives. The second largest source of income is tuna fishing, which is done with hook and line in the traditional, environmentally friendly way, but which is declining rapidly due to dwindling fish stock. Apart from that, there is some farming, consisting mostly of coconuts and papaya.
Historically, the Maldives have for hundreds of years been a crossroads for different trade routes, and this is reflected in the population which ethnically and culturally is a unique amalgamation of Indians, Africans and Arabs. In addition to that, the island state has its own written language.
But the citizens in the 100 percent Muslim country are poor, and with a national economy the size of a small European city the Maldives are totally dependant upon foreign aid and loans if the tropical paradise is to be saved from slipping away into the expansive ocean.
Who will provide the necessary hundreds of millions of dollars, and is it worth the trouble in the first place? Couldn’t the tourists just go somewhere else for their holidays and the Maldivian population move some place where the risk of getting their feet wet is less imminent?
“It is a tiny nation, and by then (2100, ed. note) the population will perhaps be half a million people who could theoretically be displaced. But can we accept the disappearance of a country and an absolutely unique culture? That is the question we need to ask ourselves,” says Jonas Kjær.
Following the tsunami, from spring 2005 till late 2007 the Dane was stationed in the Maldives by the UNDP as aid coordination advisor, aiding the Maldivian government with the economic rehabilitation. There is no doubt in his mind as to the answer.
“No, we can not accept that a country just disappears,” he says.
According to Jonas Kjær, the recipe for saving the Maldives is “population and development consolidation”. The first step would be to gather the population of the Maldives, which at the moment is scattered over 200 islands, on just 10 to 15 islands. This would at the same time make an additional number of islands available to tourists, thereby making them co-finance the relocation and rehabilitation of the local population.
The next step would be to elevate the islands artificially by two to three meters, and to build solid walls along the coast safeguarding the islands against the tide and storms.
“Of course, there are some social, cultural and historical considerations to be made. You don’t just move a population that has inhabited the islands for maybe 2,000 years. That takes political guts,” says Jonas Kjær.
In fact, population and development consolidation, nicknamed “pop concert”, has been sitting in a drawer with the previous government for at least 10 years. Due to political reluctance and fear of the population’s reaction the programme hasn’t been initiated. There seems, however, to be a growing understanding amongst the population for a need to do something – an understanding that has been augmented substantially by the impact of the tsunami.
The younger and more informed citizens have especially acknowledged the need to move, and some are already on their way. More and more young Maldivians go to Australia, New Zealand, Indonesia, Singapore, the US or the UK to study, and after finishing their studies some of them decide to stay in their new country, adding to the brain drain of their native country.
This leaves a Maldivian population, which after 30 years of semi-dictatorial rule has embarked on a positive democratic development, to hope that paradise has not already been lost.
| Read more |
Carbon
0 0 votes
Senators say U.S. climate bill making progress
by Reuters News on 13 October 2009, 23:56 PM 0 comments , 11 views
Categories: Reuters News
* Senator Boxer says bill likely to advance in November
* Senator Kerry sees "breakthrough" with Graham support
* Many doubt law will emerge before Copenhagen summit
By Richard Cowan
WASHINGTON, Oct 13 (Reuters) - Democratic U.S. senators pushing legislation on global warming said on Tuesday they were making progress in winning support for the controversial measure, which is expected to begin moving through a key Senate committee sometime in November.
"We will make our best effort and we will advance this ball and Copenhagen will know we're not fooling around," Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John Kerry told Reuters in an interview.
In early December, an international meeting convenes in Copenhagen to try to reach an agreement on the next steps for reducing greenhouse gas pollution that is blamed for global climate change.
As the leading carbon dioxide polluter in the developed world, the United States is seen as key to the success of the Copenhagen meeting, where developing countries will want to see that Washington is making progress toward controlling dangerous emissions.
On Sunday, The New York Times published a column by Kerry, a Democrat, and South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham, a Republican. The senators vowed to band together to work toward passage of a comprehensive climate change and energy bill.
"I think it's a breakthrough," Kerry told Reuters, referring to Graham's cooperation in the drive to gain enough votes for Senate passage.
Nevertheless, many are skeptical the Senate can pass legislation this year in the run-up to the Copenhagen summit.
Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairman Barbara Boxer announced her panel will kick off three days of hearings on Oct. 27 on the climate change bill that she and Kerry proposed.
That measure calls for cutting carbon emissions 20 percent by 2020, from 2005 levels, a slightly more aggressive goal than a bill passed by the House of Representatives but far less ambitious than European countries have set forth.
TIMELINE
Boxer said she hoped, in the weeks following the hearings, her committee will finish work on changes to the bill and will vote to approve it. But several other committees also must sign off on the bill.
The California Democrat said "great progress" had been made in refining the legislation, which is now being analyzed by the Environmental Protection Agency. But she stopped short of predicting passage by the full Senate this year.
"We look forward to a strong, clean energy jobs bill (being sent) to the full Senate as soon as possible," Boxer told a news conference.
As she has repeated numerous times in recent months, Boxer said refinements to the bill -- such as how many free pollution permits U.S. industries would get -- would follow the outline of the House-passed bill, with some "tweaks."
But she refused to provide details on how these "allocations" have been worked out in her bill.
Boxer said intensive discussions have been held with the Senate's coal-state interests, who have a lot at stake in legislation that aims to wean the United States off polluting fossil fuels used at many utility plants.
Kerry's discussions with Graham and other senators have focused on encouraging growth in the U.S. nuclear power industry. He said the Obama administration is "open" to such moves in a climate bill.
They also are discussing more U.S. offshore oil and gas drilling.
Liberal Democrats in Congress likely will balk at using government aid to encourage building more nuclear power plants, as well as expanding offshore oil drilling. But those might be necessary ingredients to lure some Republicans, who now largely oppose climate-change legislation. (Editing by John O'Callaghan) ((richard.cowan@thomsonreuters.com; +1 202-898-8391; Reuters Messaging; richard.cowan.reuters.com@reuters.net)) Keywords: CLIMATE USA/CONGRESS
Carbon
0 0 votes
Q+A: Why should we care about a new climate agreement?
by Reuters News on 14 October 2009, 04:07 AM 0 comments , 1 views
Categories: Reuters News
For Reuters global climate change coverage [ID:nCLIMATE]
Oct 14 - The global economy is still is bad shape, people are worried about their jobs and just paying the bills is a major challenge, hardly the right environment to get people focusing on climate change.
With so much to worry about, it can be hard to understand all the fuss about reaching a tougher U.N. climate deal in December in the Danish capital Copenhagen.
Following are some questions and answers on the importance of crafting a new agreement from 2013.
WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO ME?
A new deal will change the way energy is used, priced and created. In short, it will change the global economy.
Scientists say rich nations must find ways to make deep cuts in greenhouse gas emissions from power stations and steel mills to refineries and transport to prevent dangerous climate change.
For you and me, this will most likely mean higher fuel and electricity bills, while catching a plane will also become more expensive, as will buying imported food and drink. Insurance premiums covering storm damage or other natural disasters are also likely to rise.
In short, we'll be forced to make tougher lifestyle choices.
The flip side is that governments will help make renewable energy and greener transport more attractive, allowing people to make the switch to cleaner alternatives. Wind farms, solar, plus geothermal, wave and tidal power along with hybrid and fuel cell cars should become more commonplace as costs come down.
Financing from rich nations could also drive a green revolution in developing countries, boosting investment, creating jobs and cutting emissions.
HOW WILL THIS WORK?
It all hinges on putting a price on every tonne of greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide, produced by industry, transport or through deforestation, or saved from being emitted, such as building wind farms or saving tropical forests that soak up CO2.
Emissions trading through cap-and-trade schemes that give industries incentives to clean up will also be essential. Europe already has such a scheme, while Australia and the United States are working on their own versions.
Key to these schemes are tougher 2020 emissions reduction targets under a new climate treaty. The tougher the targets, the greater the financial incentive for industries to act.
WHAT'S THE URGENCY? CAN'T WE WAIT?
The world has already warmed on average 0.7 degrees Celsius over the past century through the burning of fossil fuels, such as oil, coal and gas. Prior to the latest financial crisis, emissions growth was increasing annually at a rate beyond past projections, driven largely by soaring coal and oil consumption in big developing nations, such as China and India.
Scientists say that the world is on course to pump enough carbon dioxide into the air to raise global temperatures by at least 2 deg C in the next few decades, a level they say will lead to more chaotic weather, rising seas, melting glaciers, water shortages and falling crop yields.
Such disruption poses major security threats because the world's population is expected to keep rising. Pollution and health problems are also growing risks.
Even if you don't believe in climate change, the world has only about 41 years of oil left based on proven reserves and 2008 consumption levels of nearly 31 billion barrels a year. As reserves fall and oil becomes harder to extract, prices of crude will continue to rise, making greener energy more attractive.
WHAT CAN JUST ONE PERSON DO?
A lot. Switch to compact fluorescent lighting in the home and office, use public transport, buy locally produced food and recycle your rubbish. Take re-usesable bags when shopping and switch off unused appliances at home.
Every little bit helps because it entrenches behaviour and gets people talking.
(Writing by David Fogarty; Editing by Nick Macfie)
((david.fogarty@thomsonreuters.com; +65 6403 5662; Reuters Messaging: david.fogarty.reuters.com@reuters.net)) ((If you have a query or comment on this story, send an email to news.feedback.asia@thomsonreuters.com)) Keywords: CLIMATE PACT/MEANING
Carbon
0 0 votes
FACTBOX-Cracking the Copenhagen climate code
by Reuters News on 14 October 2009, 04:22 AM 0 comments , 1 views
Categories: Reuters News
For Reuters global climate change coverage click [ID:nCLIMATE] and for a Q+A on the impact of a proposed pact click [ID:nSP328700]
Oct 14 - The text of an emerging new U.N. climate agreement is filled with words and phrases in brackets, obscure references to other U.N. climate treaties and mind-boggling acronyms that look like a secret code.
Except that you won't find AOSIS in a desert, MRV isn't something you can drive, minding your NAMAs has nothing to do with being polite and you can't have a BAP for breakfast.
Following are some of the acronyms in the negotiating text that cover key areas or groups that will be central to major U.N. climate talks in Copenhagen in December.
AOSIS - Alliance of Small Island States. Groups 42 members and observers from wealthy nations such as Singapore to poorer island nations vulnerable to rising seas, changing rainfall patterns and more intense storms. Has been very active in pushing for funding to help adapt to climate change impacts.
BAP -- Bali Action Plan. Nations agreed at U.N. climate talks in Bali at the end of 2007 to launch two years of negotiations to try to reach a broader climate deal that commits all nations, particularly the United States and big developing countries, to curb the growth of greenhouse gas emissions.
COP - Conference of the parties. The supreme body of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change. The Kyoto Protocol comes under the convention. A MOP is a meeting of the parties.
LULUCF - Land use, land use change and forestry. Covers ways to offset or soak up carbon emissions through planting forests, stopping forests from being chopped down, to changes in agricultural practices that promote carbon being locked away in the soil. Controversial because it can sometimes be hard to calculate how much carbon is locked away or the emissions produced from such activities. Emissions might also be accidentally released if the "carbon sink" catches fire or is destroyed by disease.
MRV -- Measureable, reportable and verifiable. Negotiators are trying to agree on ways every nation's emissions reduction steps can be regularly reported to the U.N. and independently checked to see if these steps really do cut emissions. Controversial because developing nations fear their efforts will be treated the same way as rich countries', even though wealthy nations are supposed to recognise they have a historical responsibility to commit to binding and deep cuts. Poorer nations also don't want to be held internationally accountable for voluntary cuts.
NAMAs - Nationally appropriate mitigation actions: Steps by developing countries to curb the growth of their emissions. These are not linked to binding emissions targets but can be programmes such as promoting greater use of solar or wind power, replanting and conserving forests or greater energy efficiency across industrial sectors.
QELROs - Quantified emission limitation and reduction objectives. Binding economy-wide steps by rich nations to cut emissions.
REDD - Reduced emissions from deforestation and degradation. A U.N.-backed scheme that looks to reward developing nations for preserving and protecting forests via the use of an expanded carbon market. Efforts to conserve and improve forest stocks might also be included.
(Writing by David Fogarty and Alister Doyle; Editing by Sanjeev Miglani) ((david.fogarty@thomsonreuters.com; +65 6403 5662; Reuters Messaging: david.fogarty.reuters.com@reuters.net)) ((If you have a query or comment on this story, send an email to news.feedback.asia@thomsonreuters.com))
Keywords: CLIMATE LANGUAGE
JPMorgan to buy EcoSecurities for $204 million (14 Sept 2009)
LONDON (Reuters) - JPMorgan Chase & Co agreed to buy carbon offset aggregator EcoSecurities for 122.9 million pounds ($204 million) on Monday, trumping a bid from the firm's co-founder, to boost its carbon-credit trading business.
J.P.Morgan Ventures Energy Corp., a subsidiary of the bank, said its 100 pence-a-share bid, made through Carbon Acquisition Company, had the backing of shareholders representing 19.9 percent of the company.
It said EcoSecurities had successfully realized value from sourcing, developing and trading emission reductions, and it noted the firm had recorded its first period of profitability in the first half.
The offer represents a 120 percent premium to the group's share price before the start of the offer period on June 4.
"It looks like JPMorgan is backing the current management to take the business private," said Ken Rumph, an equity analyst at Nomura Code.
Ireland-based EcoSecurities Group Plc develops clean energy projects under the Kyoto Protocol's Clean Development Mechanism, which allows companies to export cuts in greenhouse gas emissions to emerging countries like China and India, where such reductions are cheaper to make.
EcoSecurities shares were up 11.5 percent at 101.5 pence by 1411 GMT (10:11 a.m. EDT).
Carbon Acquisition Company said the acceptances included 13.6 million shares held by current and former directors and 9.9 million shares owned by Credit Suisse.
In the offer statement, Carbon Acquisition said the acceptances would remain binding in the event of a competing offer being made.
"It's a scorched earth, blocking tactic (and) it's a problem for Guanabara if these blocking minority figures are holding out," Rumph added.
EcoSecurities rebuffed on September 1 a revised 90 pence-a-share offer from Guanabara Holdings, set up by EcoSecurities co-founder and former president Pedro Moura Costa.
The board of Guanabara said Monday afternoon it noted Carbon Acquisition's offer and will make a further announcement following a review of its own position.
"It remains to be seen if Guanabara will improve its offer and bid something closer to our 'bare-bones' valuation of 114 pence per share," said Mirabaud's Agustin Hochschild.
In July, Guanabara reached a deal with then rival bidder EDF Trading, a unit of French utility EDF, offering it the option to purchase a portion of EcoSecurities' pre-2012 offset portfolio if Guanabara's bid was successful.
($1=.6027 Pound)
Rabu, 07 Oktober 2009
Carbon news - clipping
U.S., Brazilian and Indonesian Governors Urge Their Presidents to Include Forest Protection in Climate Change Policies
LOS ANGELES, Oct. 2 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and 10 other governors from the United States, Brazil and Indonesia are sending a letter to U.S. President Barack Obama, Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, and Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono urging them to include forest protection in international and national climate change policies, according to Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE5910GJ20091002).
The state governors represent California, Illinois, Wisconsin in the United States; Acre, Amapa, Amazonas, Mato Grosso and Para in Brazil; and Aceh, East Kalimantan and Papua in Indonesia. They signed the letter during the Governors' Global Climate Summit 2 taking place in Los Angeles.
"It is a vital sign of leadership that California -- which has the world's seventh largest economy -- and states with half of the world's remaining tropical forests have joined forces to make living forests worth more than dead ones," said Steve Schwartzman, director of tropical forest policy at Environmental Defense Fund. "Including forests in U.S. emissions control efforts will help achieve greater overall reductions at lower costs than would be possible without it."
The 11 states agreed on basic principles to allow reduced deforestation and degradation (REDD) to be used in the United States to meet targets for reducing global warming gas emissions. The principles establish a template for what may become the first compliance-grade REDD assets. The Waxman-Markey climate bill passed by the U.S. House of Representatives in June includes provisions for the use of REDD in a national carbon market.
"REDD is one of the key issues on the agenda at the United Nations Climate Conference in Copenhagen in December," concluded Schwartzman. "Many countries participating in the negotiations intend to agree on REDD policies, which could help developed and developing countries break the logjam holding up progress in the broader negotiation."
Deforestation accounts for 15-20 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, so forest preservation is vital in combating climate change. California and representatives from Brazil and Indonesia signed memos of understanding at last year's global climate summit. The memos called for using REDD strategies and projects that could help meet national and global emissions reductions goals, while sustaining local communities.
About Environmental Defense Fund
A leading national nonprofit organization, Environmental Defense Fund represents more than 700,000 members. Since 1967, Environmental Defense Fund has linked science, economics, law and innovative private-sector partnerships to create breakthrough solutions to the most serious environmental problems. For more information, visit www.edf.org. Contacts: Lori Sinsley, (415) 308-6970 (m), lsinsley@edf.org Stephan Schwartzman, (202) 746-9201 (m), sschwartzman@edf.org
SOURCE Environmental Defense Fund
Carbon
+7 9 votes
ANALYSIS - Carbon firm highlights risk, appetite of forest credits
by Reuters News on 11 September 2009, 10:41 AM 2 comments , 1668 views Categories: Most Discussed, Analysis, Reuters News
* Firm hopes to sell A$1.6 billion in forest credits
* But market for such carbon credits small and uncertain
* Analysts point to delivery risk from forest carbon projects
By David Fogarty, Climate Change Correspondent, Asia
SINGAPORE, Sept 11 (Reuters) - An Australian firm hoping to broker A$1.6 billion in carbon credit sales from saving tropical forests highlights the promise and peril of a U.N.-backed scheme that rewards projects for curbing deforestation.
Carbon Planet, in presentations to investors, says it has contracted 100 million carbon offsets over five years from projects in Papua New Guinea and 60 million over five years from Indonesia at an average of A$10 ($8.5) each offset, or credit.
That equates to 160 million tonnes of carbon dioxide saved from being emitted by keeping the forests standing.
None of the 25 projects in PNG and 8 in Indonesia have yielded credits although the company, a carbon services provider, hopes credits will start to flow soon and says it has buyers.
But brokers and analysts say there is no appetite currently for that volume of "avoided deforestation" credits on the global voluntary carbon market, which is driven by demand from corporates wanting to offset their carbon emissions.
Demand worth potentially billions of dollars annually would only come from future national emissions trading schemes such as in the United States and Australia and an eventual global scheme backed by the United Nations, called reduced emissions from deforestation and degradation (REDD).
Analysts say giving large credit flow forecasts from REDD projects before they are audited or validated is fraught with risk if projects do not yield as many credits as forecast.
In addition, REDD's final design has not been decided by the U.N., it is unclear how the scheme will be included in national schemes or if early REDD projects will be included in the U.N. framework.
"People are contracting REDD as though it's on the verge of becoming a compliance market," said Martijn Wilder, head of Baker & McKenzie's global climate change and emissions trading practice, referring to markets that would allow REDD credits to meet mandatory emissions curbs in rich nations.
The United Nations hopes REDD will be included in a broader climate pact the world body wants to be agreed in December during a major meeting in Copenhagen. The idea is for a global REDD credit market to formally begin in 2013.
"We are using much more conservative figures when we are talking to our investors," said Darius Sarshar from New Forests, which is developing a large REDD project in Papua, Indonesia.
In Indonesia, there are an estimated 20 projects at various stages of development, the World Bank says.
"However, such engagement remains speculative, extremely expensive and has numerous challenges," said Wilder.
COMPLEXITY
This is particularly the case given the early stage of development of REDD and the complexity and time needed to develop REDD projects in developing countries.
"In terms of the forecast market demand of voluntary credits, it is by no way even up to the volumes that I've seen promoted as imminent from REDD projects," said Chris Halliwell, a senior emissions broker for TFS Green in Melbourne, Australia.
"There seems to be a mark-to-market valuation but not really supply and demand analysis."
REDD holds the promise of unlocking billions of dollars in annual revenue to developing nations from carbon offset sales to wealthy countries.
The scheme is designed to curb deforestation and restore the world's tropical forests so they can soak up growing amounts of planet-warming carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels.
But REDD projects must provide funds for local communities, prove they are designed to address local causes of deforestation, ensure they are long-term and be able to accurately calculate how much carbon the forest will lock away over several decades.
Such complex calculations take time. Proving who actually owns the carbon stock in a given area is also crucial.
Carbon Planet's projections seem daring if only because the entire value of the world's voluntary carbon market was US$705 million in 2008, up from US$335 million in 2007, according to "State of the Voluntary Carbon Markets 2009" by Ecosystem Marketplace and analysts New Carbon Finance.
Of this, global sales of "avoided deforestation" credits were just one percent of turnover.
Carbon Planet Founder Dave Sag told Reuters the A$600 million in revenues over five years from Indonesia was "based on a very conservative estimated yield of 12 million tonnes per annum".
"I understand that people have concerns about our projections. Anyone would given the scale of them. But the numbers to us do not seem unrealistic."
TOUGH STANDARDS
Sag said the projects would meet tough yardsticks -- such as the respected Voluntary Carbon Standard (VCS) and Climate, Community and Biodiversity Project Design Standards -- and the firm was looking more to future compliance markets.
"That's why we are busting a gut to make sure that these projects are produced properly."
But large markets that will accept large volumes of REDD credits are several years away. And many developing nations have yet to develop rules governing REDD, adding to uncertainty.
Another REDD project developer in Indonesia said it was crucial to prove to investors that protecting an area of forest actually curbs deforestation and therefore emissions.
"You are basically doing projects and drafting legal agreements in the absence of any rules," said Wilder.
"From our point of view, doing a REDD project is similar to other long-term infrastructure projects in the sense that the legal foundations have to be beyond reproach," he added.
Sag says REDD credits will soon start to flow from its projects, starting later this year with 10 million VCS-standard credits from Kamula Doso rainforest in Papua New Guinea.
The company has signed a deal with a firm called Nupan, which represents the 52 land-owner groups in the 800,000 ha (2 million acres) reserve who are the legal owners of the "carbon stock".
He denies Carbon Planet is playing fast and loose with its projections, saying investors want to know the numbers.
"I am the confident the credits will start walking out the door pretty soon. We have buyers lined up."
(Additional reporting by Sunanda Creagh in JAKARTA; Editing by Michael Urquhart) ((david.fogarty@thomsonreuters.com; +65 6403 5662; Reuters Messaging: david.fogarty.reuters.com@reuters.net))
Keywords: CARBON FORESTS/DEMAND
Carbon
+1 1 vote
FACTBOX-Climate change costs, offers to pay
by Reuters News on 07 October 2009, 17:49 PM 0 comments , 6 views Categories: Reuters News
(Updates World Bank and IEA estimates)
Oct 7 (Reuters) - Countries are deadlocked on how to share the cost of fighting climate change in U.N.-led talks meant to agree a new climate pact in Copenhagen in December.
Delegates from about 180 countries are meeting in Bangkok to try and drive momentum towards a deal. [ID:nSP457708]
Climate costs are calculated as the money needed to cut greenhouse gas emissions and also prepare for more droughts and floods -- called "mitigation" and "adaptation" respectively.
Mexico reiterated on Wednesday its plan for a global fund, with individual donations calculated according to countries' wealth and contribution to global warming. [ID:nSP388133]
Estimates follow of the size of funds needed, proposals on how to raise these, and offers so far.
HOW MUCH MONEY NEEDED
1. Mitigation
* $525 billion per year extra energy investment 2010-2030 for tough carbon cuts -- International Energy Agency
* that total would be reduced to $95 billion per year after including fuel savings -- IEA [ID:nL6231420]
* 530-810 billion euros ($778-1,189 billion) per year extra investment 2020-2030 -- McKinsey
2. Adaptation
* $100-150 billion per year by 2030 globally for early weather warnings, flood prevention, irrigation -- International Institute for Environment and Development
* $75-100 billion per year from 2010-2050 -- World Bank
3. How much rich should pay developing countries
* 100 billion euros ($147 billion) per year by 2020 -- European Commission [ID:nLA157955]
* $140 billion per year by 2020 -- Greenpeace
PROPOSALS ON HOW TO RAISE MONEY
1. Norwegian proposal
* Set quotas of greenhouse gas emissions permits for rich nations for 2013-2020 of which 2 percent would be sold to them to raise funds
* Could raise $15-25 billion per year
2. Mexican proposal
* Raise an international fund from all nations, based on their responsibility for causing climate change, national wealth and population
* Could initially raise $10 billion per year
3. European Commission proposal
* Expansion of carbon markets whereby rich countries earn rights to pollute by paying for emissions cuts in the South
* Could raise up to 38 billion euros per year
4. Least Developed Countries' proposal -- Levy on international jet and shipping fuels.
* Could raise $28 billion per year
CLIMATE FUNDS ALREADY ON THE TABLE 1. Germany -- Is raising about 120 million euros per year in climate funds for developing countries from selling pollution permits to industry
2. Global adaptation fund -- Raised from a 2 percent levy on the global carbon market. Valued at just 83 million euros so far
3. World Bank's climate investment funds for developing nations -- pledges of over $6.1 billion from rich countries
4. Norway funds to slow deforestation -- Will provide up to 3 billion crowns ($510 million) a year to combat deforestation. Has committed 700 million ($119 million) to an Amazon fund -- For Reuters latest environment blogs click on: http://blogs.reuters.com/environment/ ((For a TAKE A LOOK on the politics, economics and markets of climate change click on [nCLIMATE])) (Reporting by Gerard Wynn) ((gerard.wynn@reuters.com; +44 207 542 2302))
Keywords: CLIMATE/COSTS
Carbon
0 0 votes
RPT-U.S. energy bill needs carbon cap-Obama aide
by Reuters News on 07 October 2009, 19:24 PM 0 comments , 3 views Categories: Reuters News
(Repeats to fix typo in headline)
* White House's Browner urges cap-and-trade system
* US must do more than just support renewable energy
* Will "manage in Copenhagen" if no energy bill finalized
By Ayesha Rascoe
WASHINGTON, Oct 7 (Reuters) - It would be a "big mistake" for the U.S. Congress to approve an energy bill this year without placing a cap on greenhouse emissions, the White House's top climate and energy adviser said on Wednesday.
"We think that would be a big mistake," Carol Browner told business leaders at a clean energy forum. "I think you have to keep these programs coordinated because they do impact with each other."
With climate change legislation facing a tough road to passage in the Senate, some lawmakers have suggested the chamber should instead focus on moving less controversial legislation that would just support renewable energy.
Both the House and Senate bills center around a cap-and-trade system that limits carbon emissions. Companies would need permits for every ton of carbon pollution they release into the atmosphere. Utilities and factories that don't use all their permits could trade, or sell them, to companies that need more. [ID:nCLIMATE]
Browner played down the significance of having a climate change bill approved by both chambers and signed into law before international climate negotiations begin in Copenhagen in December to try to hammer out an agreement to replace the 1997 Kyoto protocol on fighting climate change.
"We will manage in Copenhagen wherever we are in the process," Browner said.
The House passed legislation earlier this year that would limit greenhouse emissions by requiring companies to acquire permits for the carbon dioxide they release into the atmosphere. [ID:nN26325128]
After several delays, Senators John Kerry and Barbara Boxer last week unveiled their climate bill that calls for a 20 percent reduction in smokestack emissions by 2020 from 2005 levels. [ID:nN30212120]
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has said he hopes to combine the climate bill with a comprehensive energy package approved by the Senate Energy and Natural Resources committee earlier this year.
But some moderate Senate Democrats have said they would prefer to simply pass the energy package, which would require utilities to generate more electricity from renewable sources and allow more oil and gas drilling off Florida's Gulf coast.
Any climate legislation in the Senate likely faces an uphill battle, as lawmakers from heavy industrial states in both parties have raised concerns about burdening companies with additional energy costs.
Lawmakers must also contend with a crowded legislative calendar, that also includes healthcare and financial reform.
(Editing by Lisa Shumaker) ((ayesha.rascoe@thomsonreuters.com; +1 202 310 5683; Reuters Messaging: ayesha.rascoe.reuters.com@reuters.net)) ((For help: Click "Contact Us" in your desk top, click here [HELP] or call 1-800-738-8377 for Reuters Products and 1-888-463-3383 for Thomson products; For client training: training.americas@thomsonreuters.com ; +1 646-223-5546)) Keywords: USA CLIMATE/ENERGY
Carbon CalendarTM - Regulatory
28 September - 9 October 2009
7th Session of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-Term Cooperative Action and 9th Session of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Further Commitments for Annex I Parties to the Protocol.
Official negotiations on the implementation of the Bali roadmap and the development of a post-2012 system.
Bangkok, Thailand
5 October 2009
U.S. Senate Environment & Public Works Committee holds hearings on proposed cap-and-trade bill.
The EPW is expected to hold hearings all week into proposed cap-and-trade legislation.
Washington, D.C.
6 October 2009
European Parliament considers carbon leakage regulations.
The Parliament's environment committee will consider the Commission's draft list of those sectors vulnerable to carbon leakage as proposed by the European Commission.
Brussels, Belgium
7 October 2009
California AB 32 cap-and-trade meeting.
The Economic and Allocation Advisory Committee meets to discuss allocation of allowances in a state-wide cap-and-trade scheme.
San Francisco, USA
7-9 October 2009
ICAO meeting on aviation and climate change
The meeting will review the Programme of Action recommended by the Group on International Aviation and Climate Change (GIACC) for action by the aviation sector on climate change.
Montreal, Canada
10 October 2009
EU Working Party on International Environment Issues (WPIEI) meeting on climate change.
Meeting to discuss the outcome of the UNFCCC negotiations in Bangkok.
Bangkok, Thailand
11-12 October 2009
Seventh meeting of the Enforcement Branch of the UNFCCC Compliance Committee
Bangkok, Thailand
12 October 2009
Seventh meeting of the Facilitative Branch of the UNFCCC Compliance Committee
Bangkok, Thailand
12 October 2009
U.S. Senate starts "mark-up" of proposed climate legislation.
The Environment & Public Works Committee and other lead committees are scheduled to start "mark-up" of proposed c limate legislation this week.
Washington, D.C.
13 October 2009
Sixth Meeting of the Plenary of the UNFCCC Compliance Committee
Bangkok, Thailand
14-15 October 2009
International Energy Agency ministerial Meeting
The meeting will discuss global energy and environmental challenges, and will review the 2009 edition of the IEA World Energy Outlook, which is being published early to allow itrs consideration in advance of the Copenhagen talks.
Paris, France
LOS ANGELES, Oct. 2 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and 10 other governors from the United States, Brazil and Indonesia are sending a letter to U.S. President Barack Obama, Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, and Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono urging them to include forest protection in international and national climate change policies, according to Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE5910GJ20091002).
The state governors represent California, Illinois, Wisconsin in the United States; Acre, Amapa, Amazonas, Mato Grosso and Para in Brazil; and Aceh, East Kalimantan and Papua in Indonesia. They signed the letter during the Governors' Global Climate Summit 2 taking place in Los Angeles.
"It is a vital sign of leadership that California -- which has the world's seventh largest economy -- and states with half of the world's remaining tropical forests have joined forces to make living forests worth more than dead ones," said Steve Schwartzman, director of tropical forest policy at Environmental Defense Fund. "Including forests in U.S. emissions control efforts will help achieve greater overall reductions at lower costs than would be possible without it."
The 11 states agreed on basic principles to allow reduced deforestation and degradation (REDD) to be used in the United States to meet targets for reducing global warming gas emissions. The principles establish a template for what may become the first compliance-grade REDD assets. The Waxman-Markey climate bill passed by the U.S. House of Representatives in June includes provisions for the use of REDD in a national carbon market.
"REDD is one of the key issues on the agenda at the United Nations Climate Conference in Copenhagen in December," concluded Schwartzman. "Many countries participating in the negotiations intend to agree on REDD policies, which could help developed and developing countries break the logjam holding up progress in the broader negotiation."
Deforestation accounts for 15-20 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, so forest preservation is vital in combating climate change. California and representatives from Brazil and Indonesia signed memos of understanding at last year's global climate summit. The memos called for using REDD strategies and projects that could help meet national and global emissions reductions goals, while sustaining local communities.
About Environmental Defense Fund
A leading national nonprofit organization, Environmental Defense Fund represents more than 700,000 members. Since 1967, Environmental Defense Fund has linked science, economics, law and innovative private-sector partnerships to create breakthrough solutions to the most serious environmental problems. For more information, visit www.edf.org. Contacts: Lori Sinsley, (415) 308-6970 (m), lsinsley@edf.org Stephan Schwartzman, (202) 746-9201 (m), sschwartzman@edf.org
SOURCE Environmental Defense Fund
Carbon
+7 9 votes
ANALYSIS - Carbon firm highlights risk, appetite of forest credits
by Reuters News on 11 September 2009, 10:41 AM 2 comments , 1668 views Categories: Most Discussed, Analysis, Reuters News
* Firm hopes to sell A$1.6 billion in forest credits
* But market for such carbon credits small and uncertain
* Analysts point to delivery risk from forest carbon projects
By David Fogarty, Climate Change Correspondent, Asia
SINGAPORE, Sept 11 (Reuters) - An Australian firm hoping to broker A$1.6 billion in carbon credit sales from saving tropical forests highlights the promise and peril of a U.N.-backed scheme that rewards projects for curbing deforestation.
Carbon Planet, in presentations to investors, says it has contracted 100 million carbon offsets over five years from projects in Papua New Guinea and 60 million over five years from Indonesia at an average of A$10 ($8.5) each offset, or credit.
That equates to 160 million tonnes of carbon dioxide saved from being emitted by keeping the forests standing.
None of the 25 projects in PNG and 8 in Indonesia have yielded credits although the company, a carbon services provider, hopes credits will start to flow soon and says it has buyers.
But brokers and analysts say there is no appetite currently for that volume of "avoided deforestation" credits on the global voluntary carbon market, which is driven by demand from corporates wanting to offset their carbon emissions.
Demand worth potentially billions of dollars annually would only come from future national emissions trading schemes such as in the United States and Australia and an eventual global scheme backed by the United Nations, called reduced emissions from deforestation and degradation (REDD).
Analysts say giving large credit flow forecasts from REDD projects before they are audited or validated is fraught with risk if projects do not yield as many credits as forecast.
In addition, REDD's final design has not been decided by the U.N., it is unclear how the scheme will be included in national schemes or if early REDD projects will be included in the U.N. framework.
"People are contracting REDD as though it's on the verge of becoming a compliance market," said Martijn Wilder, head of Baker & McKenzie's global climate change and emissions trading practice, referring to markets that would allow REDD credits to meet mandatory emissions curbs in rich nations.
The United Nations hopes REDD will be included in a broader climate pact the world body wants to be agreed in December during a major meeting in Copenhagen. The idea is for a global REDD credit market to formally begin in 2013.
"We are using much more conservative figures when we are talking to our investors," said Darius Sarshar from New Forests, which is developing a large REDD project in Papua, Indonesia.
In Indonesia, there are an estimated 20 projects at various stages of development, the World Bank says.
"However, such engagement remains speculative, extremely expensive and has numerous challenges," said Wilder.
COMPLEXITY
This is particularly the case given the early stage of development of REDD and the complexity and time needed to develop REDD projects in developing countries.
"In terms of the forecast market demand of voluntary credits, it is by no way even up to the volumes that I've seen promoted as imminent from REDD projects," said Chris Halliwell, a senior emissions broker for TFS Green in Melbourne, Australia.
"There seems to be a mark-to-market valuation but not really supply and demand analysis."
REDD holds the promise of unlocking billions of dollars in annual revenue to developing nations from carbon offset sales to wealthy countries.
The scheme is designed to curb deforestation and restore the world's tropical forests so they can soak up growing amounts of planet-warming carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels.
But REDD projects must provide funds for local communities, prove they are designed to address local causes of deforestation, ensure they are long-term and be able to accurately calculate how much carbon the forest will lock away over several decades.
Such complex calculations take time. Proving who actually owns the carbon stock in a given area is also crucial.
Carbon Planet's projections seem daring if only because the entire value of the world's voluntary carbon market was US$705 million in 2008, up from US$335 million in 2007, according to "State of the Voluntary Carbon Markets 2009" by Ecosystem Marketplace and analysts New Carbon Finance.
Of this, global sales of "avoided deforestation" credits were just one percent of turnover.
Carbon Planet Founder Dave Sag told Reuters the A$600 million in revenues over five years from Indonesia was "based on a very conservative estimated yield of 12 million tonnes per annum".
"I understand that people have concerns about our projections. Anyone would given the scale of them. But the numbers to us do not seem unrealistic."
TOUGH STANDARDS
Sag said the projects would meet tough yardsticks -- such as the respected Voluntary Carbon Standard (VCS) and Climate, Community and Biodiversity Project Design Standards -- and the firm was looking more to future compliance markets.
"That's why we are busting a gut to make sure that these projects are produced properly."
But large markets that will accept large volumes of REDD credits are several years away. And many developing nations have yet to develop rules governing REDD, adding to uncertainty.
Another REDD project developer in Indonesia said it was crucial to prove to investors that protecting an area of forest actually curbs deforestation and therefore emissions.
"You are basically doing projects and drafting legal agreements in the absence of any rules," said Wilder.
"From our point of view, doing a REDD project is similar to other long-term infrastructure projects in the sense that the legal foundations have to be beyond reproach," he added.
Sag says REDD credits will soon start to flow from its projects, starting later this year with 10 million VCS-standard credits from Kamula Doso rainforest in Papua New Guinea.
The company has signed a deal with a firm called Nupan, which represents the 52 land-owner groups in the 800,000 ha (2 million acres) reserve who are the legal owners of the "carbon stock".
He denies Carbon Planet is playing fast and loose with its projections, saying investors want to know the numbers.
"I am the confident the credits will start walking out the door pretty soon. We have buyers lined up."
(Additional reporting by Sunanda Creagh in JAKARTA; Editing by Michael Urquhart) ((david.fogarty@thomsonreuters.com; +65 6403 5662; Reuters Messaging: david.fogarty.reuters.com@reuters.net))
Keywords: CARBON FORESTS/DEMAND
Carbon
+1 1 vote
FACTBOX-Climate change costs, offers to pay
by Reuters News on 07 October 2009, 17:49 PM 0 comments , 6 views Categories: Reuters News
(Updates World Bank and IEA estimates)
Oct 7 (Reuters) - Countries are deadlocked on how to share the cost of fighting climate change in U.N.-led talks meant to agree a new climate pact in Copenhagen in December.
Delegates from about 180 countries are meeting in Bangkok to try and drive momentum towards a deal. [ID:nSP457708]
Climate costs are calculated as the money needed to cut greenhouse gas emissions and also prepare for more droughts and floods -- called "mitigation" and "adaptation" respectively.
Mexico reiterated on Wednesday its plan for a global fund, with individual donations calculated according to countries' wealth and contribution to global warming. [ID:nSP388133]
Estimates follow of the size of funds needed, proposals on how to raise these, and offers so far.
HOW MUCH MONEY NEEDED
1. Mitigation
* $525 billion per year extra energy investment 2010-2030 for tough carbon cuts -- International Energy Agency
* that total would be reduced to $95 billion per year after including fuel savings -- IEA [ID:nL6231420]
* 530-810 billion euros ($778-1,189 billion) per year extra investment 2020-2030 -- McKinsey
2. Adaptation
* $100-150 billion per year by 2030 globally for early weather warnings, flood prevention, irrigation -- International Institute for Environment and Development
* $75-100 billion per year from 2010-2050 -- World Bank
3. How much rich should pay developing countries
* 100 billion euros ($147 billion) per year by 2020 -- European Commission [ID:nLA157955]
* $140 billion per year by 2020 -- Greenpeace
PROPOSALS ON HOW TO RAISE MONEY
1. Norwegian proposal
* Set quotas of greenhouse gas emissions permits for rich nations for 2013-2020 of which 2 percent would be sold to them to raise funds
* Could raise $15-25 billion per year
2. Mexican proposal
* Raise an international fund from all nations, based on their responsibility for causing climate change, national wealth and population
* Could initially raise $10 billion per year
3. European Commission proposal
* Expansion of carbon markets whereby rich countries earn rights to pollute by paying for emissions cuts in the South
* Could raise up to 38 billion euros per year
4. Least Developed Countries' proposal -- Levy on international jet and shipping fuels.
* Could raise $28 billion per year
CLIMATE FUNDS ALREADY ON THE TABLE 1. Germany -- Is raising about 120 million euros per year in climate funds for developing countries from selling pollution permits to industry
2. Global adaptation fund -- Raised from a 2 percent levy on the global carbon market. Valued at just 83 million euros so far
3. World Bank's climate investment funds for developing nations -- pledges of over $6.1 billion from rich countries
4. Norway funds to slow deforestation -- Will provide up to 3 billion crowns ($510 million) a year to combat deforestation. Has committed 700 million ($119 million) to an Amazon fund -- For Reuters latest environment blogs click on: http://blogs.reuters.com/environment/ ((For a TAKE A LOOK on the politics, economics and markets of climate change click on [nCLIMATE])) (Reporting by Gerard Wynn) ((gerard.wynn@reuters.com; +44 207 542 2302))
Keywords: CLIMATE/COSTS
Carbon
0 0 votes
RPT-U.S. energy bill needs carbon cap-Obama aide
by Reuters News on 07 October 2009, 19:24 PM 0 comments , 3 views Categories: Reuters News
(Repeats to fix typo in headline)
* White House's Browner urges cap-and-trade system
* US must do more than just support renewable energy
* Will "manage in Copenhagen" if no energy bill finalized
By Ayesha Rascoe
WASHINGTON, Oct 7 (Reuters) - It would be a "big mistake" for the U.S. Congress to approve an energy bill this year without placing a cap on greenhouse emissions, the White House's top climate and energy adviser said on Wednesday.
"We think that would be a big mistake," Carol Browner told business leaders at a clean energy forum. "I think you have to keep these programs coordinated because they do impact with each other."
With climate change legislation facing a tough road to passage in the Senate, some lawmakers have suggested the chamber should instead focus on moving less controversial legislation that would just support renewable energy.
Both the House and Senate bills center around a cap-and-trade system that limits carbon emissions. Companies would need permits for every ton of carbon pollution they release into the atmosphere. Utilities and factories that don't use all their permits could trade, or sell them, to companies that need more. [ID:nCLIMATE]
Browner played down the significance of having a climate change bill approved by both chambers and signed into law before international climate negotiations begin in Copenhagen in December to try to hammer out an agreement to replace the 1997 Kyoto protocol on fighting climate change.
"We will manage in Copenhagen wherever we are in the process," Browner said.
The House passed legislation earlier this year that would limit greenhouse emissions by requiring companies to acquire permits for the carbon dioxide they release into the atmosphere. [ID:nN26325128]
After several delays, Senators John Kerry and Barbara Boxer last week unveiled their climate bill that calls for a 20 percent reduction in smokestack emissions by 2020 from 2005 levels. [ID:nN30212120]
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has said he hopes to combine the climate bill with a comprehensive energy package approved by the Senate Energy and Natural Resources committee earlier this year.
But some moderate Senate Democrats have said they would prefer to simply pass the energy package, which would require utilities to generate more electricity from renewable sources and allow more oil and gas drilling off Florida's Gulf coast.
Any climate legislation in the Senate likely faces an uphill battle, as lawmakers from heavy industrial states in both parties have raised concerns about burdening companies with additional energy costs.
Lawmakers must also contend with a crowded legislative calendar, that also includes healthcare and financial reform.
(Editing by Lisa Shumaker) ((ayesha.rascoe@thomsonreuters.com; +1 202 310 5683; Reuters Messaging: ayesha.rascoe.reuters.com@reuters.net)) ((For help: Click "Contact Us" in your desk top, click here [HELP] or call 1-800-738-8377 for Reuters Products and 1-888-463-3383 for Thomson products; For client training: training.americas@thomsonreuters.com ; +1 646-223-5546)) Keywords: USA CLIMATE/ENERGY
Carbon CalendarTM - Regulatory
28 September - 9 October 2009
7th Session of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-Term Cooperative Action and 9th Session of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Further Commitments for Annex I Parties to the Protocol.
Official negotiations on the implementation of the Bali roadmap and the development of a post-2012 system.
Bangkok, Thailand
5 October 2009
U.S. Senate Environment & Public Works Committee holds hearings on proposed cap-and-trade bill.
The EPW is expected to hold hearings all week into proposed cap-and-trade legislation.
Washington, D.C.
6 October 2009
European Parliament considers carbon leakage regulations.
The Parliament's environment committee will consider the Commission's draft list of those sectors vulnerable to carbon leakage as proposed by the European Commission.
Brussels, Belgium
7 October 2009
California AB 32 cap-and-trade meeting.
The Economic and Allocation Advisory Committee meets to discuss allocation of allowances in a state-wide cap-and-trade scheme.
San Francisco, USA
7-9 October 2009
ICAO meeting on aviation and climate change
The meeting will review the Programme of Action recommended by the Group on International Aviation and Climate Change (GIACC) for action by the aviation sector on climate change.
Montreal, Canada
10 October 2009
EU Working Party on International Environment Issues (WPIEI) meeting on climate change.
Meeting to discuss the outcome of the UNFCCC negotiations in Bangkok.
Bangkok, Thailand
11-12 October 2009
Seventh meeting of the Enforcement Branch of the UNFCCC Compliance Committee
Bangkok, Thailand
12 October 2009
Seventh meeting of the Facilitative Branch of the UNFCCC Compliance Committee
Bangkok, Thailand
12 October 2009
U.S. Senate starts "mark-up" of proposed climate legislation.
The Environment & Public Works Committee and other lead committees are scheduled to start "mark-up" of proposed c limate legislation this week.
Washington, D.C.
13 October 2009
Sixth Meeting of the Plenary of the UNFCCC Compliance Committee
Bangkok, Thailand
14-15 October 2009
International Energy Agency ministerial Meeting
The meeting will discuss global energy and environmental challenges, and will review the 2009 edition of the IEA World Energy Outlook, which is being published early to allow itrs consideration in advance of the Copenhagen talks.
Paris, France
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)
