Hopenhagen
On arrival in Copenhagen it’s very clear that the locals remain hopeful. It appears that for the duration of COP 15, Copenhagen has been renamed ‘Hopenhagen’, and rightly so.
Whilst I think we all knew that an agreement with binding targets wasn’t going to happen here, from developments so far, glimmers of hope are appearing (in relation to some subjects at least).
So how are the outputs possibly going to affect the LR group and our clients?
With regard to the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), despite the results of the 51st Executive Board meeting last week rejecting 10 further Chinese wind projects for registration, efforts continue to push for reform to ensure that projects can be registered more smoothly and efficiently. The much awaited report on the independent analysis of CDM administration, conducted by McKinsey, has finally been presented, and when I read the Point Carbon article on this subject, it is clear that opinion has been voiced regarding the secretariat taking on responsibilities that were meant for the DOE’s and the report clearly recommends that decisions on project paperwork should be handed back to the DOE’s. This is good news for the continued success of the CDM.
In addition to this development, 2 working groups have been set up by the UN to look at CDM reform both pre and post 2012 – further good news!
From the international perspective however, the glimmers are a little less bright, with clear disagreements between the developed and developing countries. This Guardian article and picture of a member of the Haitian article with ‘head in hands’ says it all. A draft text was unfortunately leaked this week which proposes to hand the control of finance for climate change to the World Bank and would make available money for developing countries to act on climate change dependant on their actions. This is a very clear departure from the principles of Kyoto. In addition, the Chinese, UK and US delegations are publicly criticising each others proposals and today the developing countries were attempting to limit certain discussions to include only the countries that have ratified the Kyoto Protocol (i.e. not the US).
All that being said; I remain positive. It’s early days yet and there’s time left for tempers to ease.
COP 15 and the Future of the Human Race
Sean Cuthbert
At the end of Day 2 I was witness to a small(ish) but loud protest in the main hall of COP15 conference. Although I couldn’t understand what the protest was about, one aspect of this protest was clear – news cameras clearly outnumbered the protestors. At the start of Day 3 it was clear that what caused the spontaneous protest was reaction to a supposedly leaked document . As the initial reactions gave way to calmer voices, it became clear that the ‘leak’ was in fact non-existent. The speed with which this ‘scandal’ simply died away speaks to the seriousness and purpose of the majority of attendees at COP15. As I walk amongst the thousands of delegates, negotiators, media personnel, and fellow observers the mood is sombre and purposeful. This conference is not about tree-hugging, hemp clothing, and dreadlocks – it is about the future of the human race.
On Day 1 I had the fortune to meet with Mr. Paul Genoa, Director of Policy Development for the Nuclear Energy Institute (http://www.nei.org/). Since our meeting I have been intrigued about how nuclear energy can play a role in mitigating climate change, so I asked Paul for an interview to talk about the NEI’s role and the challenges facing the nuclear energy industry. Paul graciously accepted and we met for over an hour this morning, where we talked about a wide range of topics from the “Four Challenges” to the fuel cycle and climate change. With the US Environmental Protection Agency’s (US EPA) recent decision to include Greenhouse Gases (GHGs) under the Clean Air Act, the US has effectively labelled GHGs as harmful to human health; thus sending a very strong message to those industries with high GHG emissions. Please visit www.businessassurance.com/copenhagen for the podcast of the full interview on the 16th December.
Is climate change real? I have talked to this question in my previous blogs, but what about all the news stories about the hacked emails and distorted temperature data? Has ‘Climategate’ derailed the COP15 climate talks? Absolutely not. Cooler heads are prevailing. The serious work is still being done and measured responses to Climategate are entering the mainstream media.
MRVAribility
Dr Anne-Marie Warris
'MRVAribility - is this about the weather in Copenhagen, the negotiation sentiment or a technical term
In fact it is about the monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV) in relation to voluntary or regulated carbon market as well as a concept used in the negotiations in relation to low carbon strategies and NAMA's. Today I attended a set of sessions that cover the two issues. It was interesting to note how far the MRV in relation to the carbon market discussion has come since early CDM and EU ETS days (read 2004). IETA is putting together an analysis of MRV in relation to regulated and voluntary markets. The aim is to better understand linking issues in the MRV area. They are looking at some schemes, but not all of them. Be interesting to see what comes out of the debate. But the sessions generated some new and interesting questions and links.
On the MRV in relation to NAMAs the session looked at what NAMAs are and the challenges to deal with in the negotiations. Included in the discussions was the use of a management system standard to capture MRV for some NAMAs. Be interesting to see how that works out.
Oh and weather dry and cool and negotiation sentiments still calm and focused based on a look round the corridors.
No comments:
Post a Comment