COP17 Durban Climate Conference December 5
6th December 2011,
Africa Group briefing | NGOs demand US steps aside | China sets 5 conditions | Hope for Kyoto Protocol | Todd Stern briefing | REDD concerns for NGOs | Greenpeace activists deported |
10:32am GMT, 5 Dec update from Bill Gunyon
A simple but vivid African metaphor put the world's carbon traders in their place earlier this morning at the Africa Group press briefing.
Dr.Tosi Mpanu-Mpanu, Chair of the Group and environment minister of the Democratic Republic of Congo, referred to the wish of many business interests to dump the Kyoto Protocol but keep the Clean Development Mechanism going - this is the instrument of the Protocol that runs the rules of carbon trading, without which the supply of carbon credits would dry upy:
they want the KP rules but they don't want the KP. In Africa if you want the mango you must like the mango tree also. If you want markets to continue, if you want strong robust rules then keep the mango tree. That's what the Africa Group stands for.
Earlier in the meeting, Seyni Nafo of Mali, explained that African environment ministers met yesterday (Sunday) and reaffirmed five principles to take them into high level negotiations this week:
*commitment to the multilateral rules-based process
*a second commitment period for the Kyoto Protocol
*priority for Africa is adaptation and the existing fragmentation of adaptation funding must be sorted out
*imperative of fast start finance and the Green Climate Fund
*operationalise the Cancun agreements
10:49am GMT, 5 Dec update from Bill Gunyon
This morning's press briefing of the Climate Action Network (speaking on behalf of the world's NGOs) looks as though it is going to be devoted to an attack on the negative tactics of the US delegation in Durban.
This is led by Kumi Naidoo, executive director of Greenpeace, in much calmer but more menacing frame of mind than in the streets of Durban on Saturday.
the world was held hostage for 8 years of denial during the Bush administration. We expected better from the administration of Obama. We understand their problems but their negotiators have not come here to negotiate - they have come her with a big red pen and have spent the weekend trying to delete everything of value in the draft agreement
Naidoo's message to the US was:
if you cannot get your team on the ground to shift their negotiating positions then we are saying to the Obama administration: MOVE ASIDE.... the US delegation here is betraying not only the rest of the world but also they are betraying the 400 municipalities in the US who are trying to do something
Other CAN speakers are pursuing similar arguments.
11:15am GMT, 5 Dec update from Bill Gunyon
the Climate Action Network press briefing has closed with further confirmation the India and US are perceived as the blockers in the negotiations.
Sharan Burrow, General Secretary of the International Trade Union Confederation, complimented India as one of very few countries making serious investment in green economic development. But in the context of a legally binding climate change agreement, she warned:
stop isolating yourself and play with the rest of the world. Show that emerging economies can demonstrate leadership
The panel was asked what can be done to shift US intransigence. Speakers recalled to the breakthrough at the 2007 Bali conference which was achieved by threatening to exclude the US from the UN process to fight climate change.
But this happened at the very last moment in Bali and the NGOs want to get the message out at this earlier stage. It's also clear that they believe that the mood of the American people is behind those who want real action on climate change.
It looks as though we should anticipate a crescendo of appeals over the heads of the Obama administration to connect with municipal and grassroots groups who have already taken steps to reduce emissions.
11:37am GMT, 5 Dec update from Bill Gunyon
China's head of delegation, Xie Zhenhua, is in town and has wasted no time in conducting the country's first press briefing of the Durban conference an hour or so ago. The centre piece was a list of five conditions that must all be fulfilled for China to sign up to a mandate to reach a legally binding agreement on emissions reductions.
I don't have an accurate translation at this stage so, very provisionally, these conditions are:
*a second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol must be agreed in Durban
*all other countries must be willing to work to a 2020 timeline for implementation
*the Green Climate Fund must be launched in Durban with plans to ramp up funding to $100 billion per annum, by 2020
*full operationalisation of the Cancun agreements in Durban
*completion of scientific review of adequacy of pledges by 2013
I'll watch out for more definitive wording.
11:50am GMT, 5 Dec update from Bill Gunyon
There does seem to be a shift in mood this morning regarding the fate of the Kyoto Protocol. Christiana Figueres (head of UN climate secretariat) gave a positive interview over the weekend and made no effort to retract when questioned in the press briefing half an hour ago.
Citing the views of the Chair of the working group dealing with the Kyoto Protocol, she said:
Countries are considering how to bring a Kyoto Protocol second commitment period into effect, and not whether
Christiana said that negotiators are discussing points of detail, including the scope for participants to increase their ambition (for emission reductions).
We heard a similar conclusion from Kumi Naidoo of Greenpeace in the earlier briefing by the Climate Action Network. He was far more gloomy about it, however, reflecting: "the Kyoto Protocol may not end up in its grave in Durban but it will remain in intensive care."
What we don't know is which party has blinked in order to achieve this rumoured breakthrough. Has Europe backed down on insisting that US, China, India commit to discussions on a roadmap to a full legally binding treaty by 2015? Or have those countries found way around this condition?
12:15pm GMT, 5 Dec update from Bill Gunyon
Maite Nkoana-Mashabane, the South African chair of the Durban climate talks, was bursting with positive statements in this morning's UN press briefing.
"China is beginning to answer the question how"...."we are responding to the call made by the global citizenry" and much more of the same.
In answer to a question, Maite said that she had not heard about any "fix" to settle the affairs of the Green Climate Fund.
She insists that, in her role as facilitator of informal discussions, she has not encountered a single country which is not in favour of the Fund or which believes that the Fund will not be launched in Durban (it was of course "launched" last year in Cancun - I hope she's referring to approval of its operation and funding strategy).
Ms Nkoana-Mashabane has a disarming ability to smile even when she's dealing with the most irritating intervention in the plenary sessions which she chairs. The intensity of the smile does vary, however. This morning, after a weekend break, it was on full beam. We'll keep an eye on the smilometer as the week progresses.
12:29pm GMT, 5 Dec update from Bill Gunyon
Today's US delegation press briefing is due to start any minute.
How will it respond to the blistering attack in its negative "red pen" attitude by NGOs earlier this morning?
Everyone else is talking positive today - can the US match that?
Will they turn up?
12:42pm GMT, 5 Dec update from Bill Gunyon
Todd Stern, US special envoy on climate change is speaking now.
The contrast with his Chinese counterpart is more striking than ever. Xie Zhenhua has an inscrutable countenance behind which a hint of humour is never absent.
Todd Stern just does inscrutable.
His statement: "I'm pleased to be here representing the US," carried the conviction of the condemned man asked for his final words.
1:10pm GMT, 5 Dec update from Bill Gunyon
this was terrible. Where were the real journalists in the briefing by US climate envoy Todd Stern just completed?
We had a sequence of American media asking questions designed to make Mr Stern feel that Durban ain't so hot after all. They were tough questions but not the tough questions.
Nobody asked about the chronic shortfall in current pledges for emission reductions, especially in relation to recent scientific reports.
Nobody asked about the African anger that the continent's soil is overheating while the grain baskets of the north flourish.
Nobody asked why the US delegation is being so obstructive in the line-by-line work which these negotiations must get through.
Where were John Vidal and Richard Black? Why was no African journalist invited to ask a question?
1:23pm GMT, 5 Dec update from Bill Gunyon
In terms of what Todd Stern actually said in the US press briefing, I sense the critical moment came in an unplanned afterthought.
He had just completed a long peroration on why there's virtually no chance of agreement in Durban on the core issue of a future legally binding climate regime. The next question was almost under way when Stern scratched his head as if regretting the negative tone of his words - he interrupted so that he could add a bit more:
There's two aspects to the European proposal that's being talked about. One is the process (what they cal la roadmap) to carry us forward to period when we could be getting credibility for a new agreement. The other is how that final endpoint will look. We're quite open to having a discussion to lay out a process but not to determine the legal form.
I wonder whether, without really intending to, Todd Stern just painted a picture what might become the Durban mandate.
1:38pm GMT, 5 Dec update from Bill Gunyon
sorry to keep posting about the Todd Stern press briefing but it's clearly critical to setting the tone for the ministerial phase of the climate negotiations starting tomorrow.
Well known positions of the US were repeated. No legally binding deal which attempts to differentiate between national obligations - "legal parity" is the buzz phrase. And presumption that the emerging economies like China and India are just not ready to accept this.
A couple of other points of possible interest:
*Stern is due to meet his Chinese counterpart tomorrow
*US emissions are down about 6% on 2005, on way to 17% target by 2020
And finally just to wind everyone up, here's Stern's comment on the governance of the Green Climate Fund:
I want to see a Green Climate Fund that will draw in a lot of capital (my comment here - that means leveraged borrowing). I like climate negotiators very much and I spend a lot of time with them but climate negotiators are not necessarily the right people to run a multi-billion dollar fund
Anyone remember the management of the US banking system circa 2008?
1:42pm GMT, 5 Dec update from Bill Gunyon
if you have any comments about a post in this blog, or if you wish to point out an error, please write to me at guides@oneworld.net5:21pm GMT, 5 Dec update from Bill Gunyon
Dr.Tosi Mpanu-Mpanu, environment minister of the Democratic Republic of Congo and Chair of the Africa Group, explains the priorities for the Group in the ministerial negotiations starting tomorrow at the Durban climate talks.
5:26pm GMT, 5 Dec update from Bill Gunyon
Todd Stern, US Special Envoy on Climate Change, answers key questions about the US position on the Green Climate Fund and on the principle of a long term binding agreement on climate change. He was speaking at a press briefing at the Durban climate talks today.
9:13pm GMT, 5 Dec update from Bill Gunyon
Here's the WWF International Director General bringing us back to earth
9:17pm GMT, 5 Dec update from Bill Gunyon
and here's one from the BBC Environment Correspondent known to be not averse to irony
BBCRBlack: Canadian Environment Minister Kent did describe oil/tar sands development as 'responsible and sustainable' at news conf #COP17
9:51pm GMT, 5 Dec update from Bill Gunyon
This is the problem with Twitter. European Climate Commissioner, Connie Hedegaard, was warming up nicely to say something interesting....
CHedegaardEU: Sometimes messages are more progressive at public press conferences than in negotiation rooms...
10:08pm GMT, 5 Dec update from Anuradha Vittachi
OneClimate's Jeff Allen reports for US cable television with an update at the start of the crucial second week. Is the US facing up to the urgency of the climate crisis as others see it?
1:16am GMT update from Bill Gunyon
Greenpeace, WWF and CARE have added their considerable weight to accusations that (as they put it): "UN Forest Protection Scheme Heading in Wrong Direction."
This refers to the current state of play with REDD (reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation) and in particular the "safeguards" that are supposed to protect the rights of forest people.
Bearing out the conclusion we reached here yesterday, the NGOs warn:
The outcome on REDD safeguards is a step backwards from what was agreed in Cancun last year, which itself was far short of what could have been agreed in Copenhagen (two years ago)
Forest people need protection because REDD will release cash in return for preventing deforestation. That sounds simple enough but, where there's cash, there's trouble.
Representatives of indigenous groups are holding a press conference later this morning.
1:29am GMT update from Bill Gunyon
I'm unable at this stage to pick up any media coverage of the briefing given by the Canadian environment minister, Peter Kent, on his arrival in Durban for the climate talks.
I understand that he did not confirm or deny rumours that Canada will give notice to quit the Kyoto Protocol before the end of the current commitment period. It is no secret that Canada will have nothing to do with a second period.
Listen out for sweeteners in the shape of Canada's contribution to the 2010-2012 period of $30 billion of "fast start finance" for developing countries. It sounds as though the amount could be $1.2 billion.
1:53am GMT update from Bill Gunyon
Greenpeace continues to have banner trouble in South Africa.
Last month a daring stunt at the Eskom power station building site at Kusile was slightly devalued due to difficulty in getting the banner aligned for the camera angle.
On Sunday at the Protea Edward Hotel on the Durban beachfront, it looks as though the banner never made it out of the rucksack before the activists were arrested.
The hotel was hosting the World Business Council on Sustainable Development, a tempting target for Greenpeace who are promoting a new report exposing how big corporations are holding up the fight against climate change.
Greenpeace head Kumi Naidoo tweeted this morning (below) to congratulate the activists who were arrested. But to no avail - latest local media reports disclose that three of the activists are to be deported.
kuminaidoo: Thank you and Well done to the 6 @Greenpeace activists who were arrested during action against #dirtydozen outside #cop17 business summit.
2:11am GMT update from Bill Gunyon
McKibben speaks: at last the great communicator trains his firepower on the Durban climate talks.
He forced the Obama administration to shift its ground on the Keystone XL pipeline. Can McKibben work the magic on the UN climate process?
There's a typically grabbing opening sentence:
The most important piece of news yesterday, this week, this month, and this year was a new set of statistics released yesterday by the Global Carbon Project
This refers to a report which informs us that global carbon dioxide emissions in 2010 increased by 5.9% and that atmospheric concentration has risen to 389 parts per million. The latter data in particular cannot be welcome news to the founder of 350.org.
The odd thing is that these results are not news at all - they have been in the public domain from other sources for some weeks.
It means, in diplomatic terms, that the endless talks underway in Durban should be more important than ever--they should be the focus of a planetary population desperate to figure out how it’s going to survive the century.
and much more worth reading.
2:27am GMT update from Bill Gunyon
Turning to the core business of the negotiators in the Durban Convention Centre yesterday, the 143-page consolidated draft text was examined in a plenary session.
Few kind words were spoken about it, but this is not too unusual at this stage. Be thankful that there is any document at all for the ministers to start work on today. The Chair of the plenary said that a second draft would be forthcoming on Wednesday.
Be thankful too that the Kyoto Protocol survives for the moment. One or two key observers are saying that some sort of grudging second commitment period may be squeezed out of the process. As Martin Khor of Third World Network puts it:
A quick death is now unlikely, given the protests it will generate and the bad name this will give the perpetrators. Putting it on life support is the alternative.
Martin also tells us what we don't want to hear:
The original agreed idea, that all developed counties would collectively cut their emissions by a target (25-40% by 2020) .....is all but gone, not even mentioned in draft conclusions of the conference
That target was of course in line with the recommendations by scientists, the approach laid down in the 1992 Convention document.
3:00am GMT update from Bill Gunyon
Overnight media reports on the Durban climate talks tie themselves in knots over China's five conditions for joining the European roadmap. The EU calls for a mandate for all parties to join a legally binding agreement on emissions reductions at a date to be agreed.
Each condition announced by the head of the delegation, Xie Zhenhua, has behaved like one of those Chinese proverbs that gets lost in translation. Make that five proverbs and you have some difficulty.
None of these reports (and mine was no exception) proved able to pin down exactly what were the conditions, or even if there were five rather than four.
It doesn't make any difference for now. The EU, China (and later on, Brazil) sound positive whilst the US and India sound negative. Todd Stern, head of the US delegation, said he would discuss it all with China today. But it's plain that he doesn't believe there is substance in the offer.
One report suggests that he might be right. The AP piece by Arthur Max in Huffington Post claims to be on the inside track with the EU delegation:
Despite public declarations it would participate in a legally binding agreement in the future, China unequivocally told the EU it would not accept binding targets for itself, said the delegate, speaking on condition of anonymity because negotiations were still in an early phase
Meanwhile, China continues to be the hub around which this conference spins, as you can see.
