It’s bracket time again in the surreal, but necessary, world of climate change diplomacy.
In what counts as progress in preparations for Paris negotiations aimed at forging the first new global climate agreement since 1992, the United Nations secretariat managing the process issued a news release today titled, “ First Draft of New Climate Change Agreement Presented to Governments.”
The draft was produced by the “Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action,” a subset of government representatives created in 2011 to streamline the forging of language that might be acceptable to the 196 countries that will convene for two weeks starting on Nov. 30. The group is led by two long-serving diplomats with environmental portfolios, Ahmed Djoghlaf of Algeria and Daniel Reifsnyder of the United States. To learn more about them and their task, I encourage you to read or listen to a fine NPR story filed in May by Nell Greenfieldboyce.
Months of painstaking discussions have greatly whittled things down from negotiating outlines released in February (86 pages) and then July (76 pages), which were nicely summarized at the time by Carbon Brief.
In U.N. parlance, what has emerged is a non-paper – meaning a draft (technically in this case, a pair of drafts of two documents) with no official status. This is the only way such pre-negotiation negotiations can take place.
The problem? The draft is so riddled with brackets that all John Oliver would have to do to elicit a gale of laughter on “Last Week Tonight” is read it aloud.
Here’s a sample from the section on plans for mitigating emissions of greenhouse gases:
Parties aim to reach by [X date] [a peaking of global greenhouse gas emissions][zero net greenhouse gas emissions][a[n] X per cent reduction in global greenhouse gas emissions][global low-carbon transformation][global low-emission transformation][carbon neutrality][climate neutrality]. 2. Each Party [shall][should][other] regularly communicate a nationally determined mitigation [contribution][commitment][other] that it [shall][should][other] implement. 3. Each Party’s nationally determined mitigation [contribution][commitment][other] [shall][should][other] reflect a progression beyond its previous efforts, noting that those Parties that have previously communicated economy-wide efforts should continue to do so in a manner that is progressively more ambitious and that all Parties should aim to do so over time. Each mitigation [contribution][commitment][other] [shall][should][other] reflect the Party’s highest possible ambition, in light of its national circumstances, and: (a) [Be quantified or quantifiable;] (b) [Be unconditional, at least in part;] (c) [Other].
Read on. But don’t necessarily weep.
It’s no accident that Climate Nexus, a climate communication project created by environment-oriented philanthropies, launched a website earlier this year called “The Road Through Paris” — not the Road to Paris.
It’s a long road, and march.
A shift away from hard targets and timetables to reporting of measurable national commitments has allowed for far wider participation.
Plenty has been going on, including fresh commitments by India to boost renewable and nuclear energy generation along with the expanded coal use its leaders deem necessary and justified given its energy needs. Here’s how India defended its coal needs in its submission to the United Nations climate treaty office:
India accounts for 2.4% of the world surface area, but supports around 17.5% of the world population. It houses the largest proportion of global poor (30%), around 24% of the global population without access to electricity (304 million), about 30% of the global population relying on solid biomass for cooking and 92 million without access to safe drinking water.
The average annual energy consumption in India in 2011 was only 0.6 tonnes of oil equivalent (toe) per capita as compared to global average of 1.88 toe per capita. It may also be noted that no country in the world has been able to achieve a Human Development Index of 0.9 or more without an annual energy availability of at least 4 toe per capita. With a HDI of 0.586 and global rank of 135, India has a lot to do to provide a dignified life to its population and meet their rightful aspirations.
In July, I explained why I agree with India’s position.
After 27 years of tracking this process, since the Conference on the Changing Atmosphere in Toronto in 1988) I’ve come to terms with, if not embraced, brackets and escape clauses.
It might be worth re-reading this piece to get what I mean: “In Climate Talks, Soft is the New Hard – and That’s a Good Thing.”