Day 12: Report from Reed Smith Delegates in Copenhagen at the United Nations Climate Change Conference

This post was written by Larry Demase.

Just like our Day 1 report from Copenhagen, we are back to a bunch of “C” words. This time they include: commitments, cost, China, closed door meetings, and, of course, confusion. We will certainly post a COP-15 recap and try to explain “what it all means.”

As of this 22:00 GMT posting, it is being reported that “developed and developing countries have now agreed to listing their national actions and commitments, a finance mechanism, to set a mitigation target of 2 degrees Celsius and to provide information on the implementation of their actions through national communications, with provisions for international consultations and analysis under clearly defined guidelines.”

It remains to be seen how this agreement compares to the last (and fourth) draft of the “Copenhagen Accord”. The fourth draft had called for global GHG emissions to be cut by 50% from 1990 levels by 2050, with Annex I Parties (industrialized nations except the United States) committing to reductions of 80% by the same time. Other nations would “implement mitigation actions”, in the form of national action plans, that would be updated every two years. The fourth draft also acknowledged the scientific view that nations need to keep emissions below a level that stops the global average temperature exceeding a 2 degrees Celsius increase above pre-industrialized levels.

Earlier in the day at the high level Plenary Session, President Obama said that the framework for an agreement was clear and had three parts: “mitigation, transparency and financing”. He added that all major economies must take decisive national action to reduce emissions, there must be a mechanism in place to insure commitments are being kept and there must be accountability among nations and finally developed countries must provide financing for the “poorest and most vulnerable” countries. He agreed on to $10/100 billion aid number but clearly indicated that there were issues to be worked out on how the money was to be distributed. He guaranteed that US would meet its commitments despite what happened in Copenhagen (a guarantee that the GOP will likely seize upon).

President Obama was preceded at the podium by the Chinese premier Wen Jiabao who said “trust us” on our emission reduction program and emphasized that in China there were still more than 125 million poor people in China. President Obama and Prime Minister Wen Jiabao also had two meetings over the course of the day.

Also at the Plenary Session this morning at the COP, Business and Industry groups delivered a high level statement for the entire COP/CMP, and written copies of the states were provided in the room for the UNFCCC secretariat and others. Recognizing that as a stakeholder group, BINGOs have a big “stake” as over 80 per cent of the resources required to fund global activities to halve emissions by 2050 and develop and deploy the required technologies will come from the private sector via investments and carbon markets, the BINGO statement called for (1) predictability through the adoption of medium- and long-term realistic and ambitious objectives and actions in all major economies, and (2) clear, simple and flexible processes to stimulate the innovation.

Day 11: Report from Reed Smith Delegates in Copenhagen at the United Nations Climate Change Conference

This post was written by Larry Demase.

Prior to being replaced, Connie Hedegaard analogized the last minute nature of the COP to procrastinating elementary school students, stating, “It’s just like schoolchildren. If they have a very long deadline to deliver an exercise they will wait for the last moment…. It’s basically as simple as that.” With one full day left, COP-15 is in countdown mode and we’ll see if the parties finish their homework on time.

Underscoring the urgency, political heavyweights are here and making the rounds, including Prime Minister Gordon Brown, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former Vice President Al Gore, and Senator John Kerry. In a plenary session, Prime Minister Brown stated that there was no insurmountable obstacle to an agreement in Copenhagen which could be turned into a binding treaty in 6-12 months. He called for (a) long term goal of 2 degree temperature increase; (b) immediate (ok, year 2012) aid of $10 billion to developing countries; (c) $100 billion in long term financing to developing countries; and (d) a commitment by all countries to reduce emissions to a degree consistent with their “highest ambition”.

The headline from Secretary of State Clinton’s remarks is that the United States would contribute to a $100 billion fund to help developing countries cope with climate change. Japan and the European Union have already committed to building such a fund by 2020, and it was viewed as providing new hope to an agreement in Copenhagen. She said United States was ready to enter into a partnership with the world under the following conditions:

  • that there would exist a strong operational accord which binds nations to their commitments (and emphasized that there would be no deal for developing countries without a strong operational accord)
  • that the accord would include transparency in tracking emissions reductions with regard to national efforts (read: China needs to open up)
  • that financial aid has to go to the “poorest and most vulnerable nations” (read: not China)
  • that the US preferred reforestation and adaptation projects in developing countries.

The Secretary of State added that the Obama Administration was also ready to move forward (with Congress) on a 30% reduction in GHG emissions in 2025, a 42% reduction in 2030 and an 80% reduction in 2050. She also lamented the disruption in talks and stressed that all counties had to now work together. On the last point, I saw some sarcasm in her voice when she quoted a Chinese philosopher: “When you are in a common boat you must cross the river peacefully together”.

Her remarks underscore the challenge of reducing GHG emissions while maintaining US companies’ competitiveness and ensuring that countries, especially China, carry out their commitments. The Obama Administration and the US Congress do not want any emissions reductions actions or outgoing foreign assistance to hurt US industry and lead to the loss of domestic jobs. In the last day of COP-15 negotiations, look for increased pressure on China to agree to transparent MRV: monitoring, reporting and verification of GHG emission reductions.