Carbon Copenhagen

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