COP17 Durban Climate Conference Nov 27

Sleepy journalists were handbagged earlier this afternoon by the feisty UN climate boss, Christiana Figueres, when unable to sustain a flow of questions on what she called "a revolution in every sense of the word." After all, not many press conferences address such a topic.

Sometimes you feel that Ms Figueres is single-handedly holding together the whole crumbling edifice of UN climate change negotiations. She carefully assembles recent evidence that a breakthrough is imminent - the scientific reports, the steps taken by government, business and activists. Logically, she concludes:

But she conceded that this is the most difficult issue for the talks and is unlikely to be addressed seriously until the ministers arrive next week.

On being asked what would constitute a successful outcome for the Durban conference, Ms Figueres said:

On the Cancun issues that could get under way in 2012, she mentioned especially the Technology Mechanism, Adaptation Framework, Green Climate Fund and the Periodic Review of the adequacy of emissions commitments as at 2015.

"What is the Durban roadmap?" asked Ms Figueres when a questioner mentioned the phrase in relation to approach taken by the Eureopan Union.

I do hope this particular moniker falls by the wayside. Its predecessor, the 2007 Bali Roadmap, was greeted with ecstatic cheering but now lies in ruins.

As the journos flagged, a desperate appeal went out to Twitter for a question. That too, fell on deaf ears.

Maybe the 140-character limit is too much of a toy to grasp the adult world of global warming. That's one reason why you should keep an eye on this blog and our video interviews over the coming fortnight. 

The OneClimate team is now on the ground in Durban and will be providing you with breaking news, interviews and videos over the next two weeks. Use @oneclimate on Twitter to get in touch!

Here's a new report, produced by the Canadian research group, Polaris Institute, called "Corporations, Climate and the United Nations. It has a sub-title that is so explicit that it almost excuses the reviewer from bothering to study the content:

The introduction explains:

At the heart of this conclusion lies the view that business has been awarded a status within the negotiations which is too similar to that enjoyed by NGOs. If you follow the talks, you'll come across the UN acronym for business interests which rather gives the game away - BINGOs (Business and Industry Non-Governmental Organisations). 

The number of BINGO participants attending these annual UN climate talks has grown steadily, exceeding 2,000 by the 2009 round in Copenhagen.

They undertook a 3km walk following a blue line marking a potential future high tidemark. Lots of good pictures in this article, although the text isn't strictly correct - there was no blue line because city authorities withheld permission to paint on roads and pavements.

The Board completed its business on Friday. The NGO CDM-Watch reports that, whilst the proposal was not approved, the Board decided that the rules for coal should be rewritten.

I wonder if the CDM Board will read this arresting article by Shell's climate change advisor, David Hone. It's not easy to understand but I think he's saying that current fossil fuel energy supplies are unable to meet demand (he doesn't use the phrase "peak oil") and that the surge in renewable energy production is making good this shortfall rather than displacing oil, coal and gas as intended.

This is not exactly a message to warm the hearts of environmental campaigners in Durban.

Mr Hone's solution is to scrap all carbon credits for projects in developing countries except those relating to deforestation and carbon capture and storage technologies.

This is all quite radical and complicated. I hope that my colleagues or other media in Durban may be able to find David Hone and unpick his message.