*[Enwl-eng] [can-eecca] ECO - Monday December 10
ENWLine
12 Years Left: What Have You Done to Respond to the SR1.5?
The SR1.5 report is a game-changer and Parties cannot leave Katowice without responding. And how, dear Ministers, does ECO think you should respond? With nothing less than a COP decision in which countries commit to strengthening their NDCs no later than 2020. You will be attending many high-level events this week on pre-2020 ambition, finance and the Talanoa Dialogue and ECO decided to make things easier for you by outlining what commitments are needed in such a decision.
First, commit to strengthening NDCs in line with the SR1.5 report. At the end of November, 48 of the most vulnerable countries committed to strengthening NDCs in line with the SR1.5 report during the Climate Vulnerable Forum Virtual Summit. Likewise, 19 European Heads of State or Government have called on all countries to revisit and update their NDCs; ECO hopes they haven’t forgotten the EU’s NDC is also in need of revision! In June, 23 countries, including Argentina, Canada, France, Germany, New Zealand, Norway, and Spain, committed to exploring the possibility of stepping up their ambition. Now that these countries have been presented with the SR1.5 ECO expects that they will follow through with the utmost urgency.
As the most vulnerable countries noted: significant and urgent measures are needed to halve emissions by 2030 — including phasing out coal power. Parties will also need to submit or revise their mid-century emission reductions development strategies. ECO was pleased to hear Japan commit in its contribution to the Talanoa Dialogue that it will be submitting in 2019.
Second, Parties need to commit to launching or accelerating domestic processes to strengthen these NDCs. Last week, four former COP Presidents’ from Fiji, Morocco, France and Peru, issued a declaration inviting Parties to do just that; highlighting the importance of multi-stakeholder participation.
The domestic processes are necessary, but not sufficient. There needs to be a process within the UNFCCC that ensures Parties are moving with the urgency that the SR1.5 requires. The most vulnerable hinted at such a process in their CVF declaration. Such a process would complement external events like the UN Secretary General’s Climate Summit in September 2019. For instance, next June, Parties should update others on the progress made in strengthening their NDCs.
Third, Parties must launch consideration of the post-2025 finance goal. It really goes without saying that if all Parties are expected to strengthen their NDCs by 2020, the poor and most vulnerable countries need clarity on financing post-2025.
The declarations from the CVF Virtual Summit, the European Heads of State and Government, the Past COP Presidents, the June Ambition declaration as well as very helpful submissions from AILAC, CARICOM, EIG, LDCs and AOSIS, show that the beginnings of a high ambition coalition to deliver a strong and substantive COP decision to respond to the SR1.5 report.
We leave you with some advice to keep in mind heading into week two of negotiations:
- EU, you need to support the most vulnerable in building this coalition;
- Umbrella Group, your comments about post-2025 finance goal as a non-starter are unhelpful, to put it diplomatically. What about trying a more positive and constructive approach next time you’re given the floor?
- Canada, New Zealand and Norway, you like to paint yourselves as ambitious, but this position on the post-2025 goal really calls that into question. When will you start to walk the talk?
- Japan if you would like your candidacy for the GCF Executive Director position to be taken seriously, you too need to move on the post-2025 finance goal and announce your replenishment for the GCF. When can we expect this to happen?
- Argentina, it’s time to talk to your (A)BU colleagues and bring them along!
- USA, Kuwait, Russia and Saudi Arabia: your behaviour in refusing to welcome or endorse the SR1.5 report in some SBSTA conclusions on Saturday night was appalling. ECO really wonders whether you can read, if that is your response to the SR1.5. If you cannot support the global response to the SR1.5, then get out of the way.
- Saudi Arabia (yes, you again), we have one special question: you’ve been putting up a horror show ever since day one, aren’t you tired? Because we kind of are.
- BASIC, some of you did not feel welcomed to join the High Ambition Coalition, but don’t worry – the door remains open to you all.
- AOSIS, AILAC, CARICOM, EIGs and LDCs: stay strong and demand the action the world needs!
ECO has faced some disappointments in week one. The good news, dear Ministers, is you have all of week two to make this a successful COP. ECO is taking the SR1.5 very seriously; it’s time for you to show the world that you are too.
----
Money Monday
Welcome to smoggy Katowice, dear Ministers. As you set foot into the Spodek and join the more than 25,000 people participating at this COP, you might quickly notice we were expecting you. Normally, the 2nd week of COP represents mostly political moments. However, you will quickly realize this year is different.
Five days before the deadline to adopt the Paris Agreement Rulebook, you find yourselves, specifically on finance, between the mysterious technical world of these negotiations and your political agenda.
It’s money, money, money. You will quickly notice that nothing will get done unless we do this right. ECO wants to help. As you get briefed by your advisors and Head of Delegation on the Katowice Package, you will quickly learn about the finance package.
It’s pretty simple and straightforward. Climate finance is at the heart of the Paris Agreement. To achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement, transparent, adequate, and predictable sources are needed specifically for the most vulnerable countries already facing the impacts of climate change. ECO hopes the 3rd High Level Ministerial Dialogue on Climate Finance will be used to confirm that.
Countries should use this moment to speak about ambition, set high expectation on the Green Climate Fund replenishment, and speak about the importance of making finance flows consistent with a pathway towards low greenhouse gas emissions and climate resilient development. At the same time, this moment should be an opportunity to raise the issue of loss and damage finance and the urgent need to scale up support for the most vulnerable countries.
We are positive you know this already, but there cannot be ambition if there is not trust. That is why in the rulebook, Article 9 sets modalities to ensure proper accounting of financial flows from developed countries. To ensure transparency, these guidelines must ensure climate finance flows are reported in detail for each project, including the net value of the support, and how this support is new, additional and aimed for climate action.
Now, in order for developing countries to prepare their NDCs, the Paris Agreement requests rich developed countries to provide indicative information on climate finance mobilization and financial resources that developed countries will provide to developing countries for mitigation and adaptation, as stated in Article 9.5 of the Paris Agreement. There is some progress so far and information to be provided has been identified. However, what is missing is defining what to do with it. Let’s make sure this information informs Parties and the global stocktake.
Ministers, you will be called to state your position about the post-2025 financial goal. If that is the case, what we need from you is just to confirm that such a discussion must take place. But you need to say it.
If someone ever asks about the Adaptation Fund serving the Paris Agreement, note that at this COP we just need a decision to ensure a smooth transition of the fund from the CMP to the CMA. Such a decision should aim to protect the integrity of the Adaptation Fund’s current structure. It is all a question of sequencing.
Don’t worry: ECO will be here to walk you through the most contentious issues to be faced at this COP. We know you can make it and deliver on the spirit of Paris by making finance a key pillar of the Rulebook and providing the much needed real finance that will spur climate action by 2020.
----
Fire in the Arctic Circle
Reindeer herding has long been a central part of Saami culture. Unfortunately, temperature changes are increasingly devastating this tradition: it’s more and more difficult to find food for grazing and many animals have perished from diseases. Sanna Vannar, a 22-year-old Saami living in the Arctic Circle comes from a traditional reindeer herder family. She is deeply concerned, “If we lose the reindeers, the Saami culture will be lost.” This summer, she lived the devastating wildfires in the Arctic circle.
Maurice, a French lavender farmer, lost 44% of his revenue in the last 6 years, due to consecutive droughts in the south of France. His son Renaud is the first generation who can no longer guarantee sufficient income for the whole family.
Only a year ago, Armando, a Portuguese land owner, lost his home, as well as all his forested land, to the wildfires.
The Vlad family lives in the Carpathian Mountains and is at risk of losing their family farm, livestock, and traditional occupation due to increasing temperatures and droughts. They now have to take their cattle to a much higher altitude for water and decent grass. Petru Vlad, the father, explains, “I cannot go any further up with our herds, because above 2000m there is only the sky.”
All these families have one thing in common. They suffer from the consequences of climate change, regardless of where they live, reminding us that no one is immune to its devastating impacts.
They also know that missing the1.5°C target will irreversibly change their lives. They are taking action in the only way possible for citizens: taking the EU Member States to court over its unambitious 2030 target. But, seriously, do governments need a court decision to fulfill their duty and protect citizens?
----
The U.S. Fossil Sideshow
Today’s official U.S. side event promoting fossil fuels is bound to attract a lot of attention - after all, the U.S. is the only party which officially intends to quit the Paris Agreement. While it is obvious that any event promoting greater fossil fuel use has no place here at COP24, ECO readers should keep in mind a few things:
1) As was the case with a near-identical U.S. side event at COP23 last year, this year’s U.S. event is designed to anger COP attendees and divert attention from real climate leadership. The Trump White House delights in enraging its enemies (namely, anyone who accepts climate science). If today’s event makes you mad, remember that Trump’s coal-and-oil lackeys want you to be mad.
2) This event is also a performance intended to satisfy both President Trump’s diehard supporters back home and appease his fossil industry patrons, who have a direct financial incentive in weakening the Paris Agreement. Wells Griffith, the ringleader of today’s event and Trump’s chief climate advisor, cannot keep his job unless he publicly pleases the boss. Remember: Trump’s world is Game of Thrones. Everyone is one tweet away from being fired.
3) Despite what will be said at the U.S. event today, the Trump team cannot deliver on their promise to build an international alliance to support coal. They promised the same thing at COP23, and they have failed. U.S. coal plant closures have doubled during Trump’s second year in office; U.S. coal use will likely reach its 39-year low in 2018. The Trump team talks the talk, but can’t walk the walk - and they’re attending COP24 at a time when the U.S. press is focused on the Mueller investigation and the circus surrounding it.
At the same time as this side event, a broad and powerful coalition of cities, states, businesses, and beyond will be convening in the U.S. Climate Action Center here at COP to showcase their inspiring efforts to enhance climate action — creating jobs, powering adaptation, and transitioning to renewables. All this comes days after the U.S. government unanimously affirmed the devastating impacts of manmade climate change in the U.S. So, remember that this side event is a bit more than a sideshow hosted by people who want to be taken seriously - but is best be ignored.
----
🎶 F.M.C.P 🎶
We know we’ve raised it before, but this is really important. The facilitative, multilateral consideration of progress (FMCP) will only be effective if it builds on the expertise and perspectives of civil society. ECO is asking Parties to allow observers to participate in the FMCP under the Paris Agreement’s enhanced transparency framework. Since ECO was unable to participate in the multilateral assessment and facilitative sharing of views this session, we presented our questions in a previous ECO. ECO appreciates that the Marshall Islands posed our questions to Germany. However, it’d be more efficient if you just let us ask the questions directly.
In the spirit of the CAN party on Saturday night, we want you to continue singing and dancing so we are sharing the song we wrote during the Bangkok session about the FMCP.
(To be read in a “sing-songy” voice to the tune of the Village People’s YMCA)
Party, there’s a place we can go.
I said, Party, let us compliment your info
You can play there, and I’m sure we will find
Many ways to have a good time
It’s fun to be - a - part of the F.M.C.P.
It’s fun to be - a - part of the F.M.C.P.
We could provide info, we could send in questions,
We will add some action...
Party, are you listening to me?
I said, Party, what do you want it to be?
I said, Party, you can make real the PA.
But you got to know this one thing!
No Party does it all by themselves.
I said, Party, let us participate,
And just let us in the F.M.C.P.
We are here to help you today!
It’s fun to be - a - part of the F.M.C.P.
It’s fun to be - a - part of the F.M.C.P.
----
12.5 Months to Go, but Pre-2020 Isn’t Going Anywhere
The pre-2020 issue is a waiting game where everyone loses. People who are vulnerable — as they face dangerous loss and damage from climate impacts. People and communities all over the world — whose recent development successes may be undone. Those employed in the fossil fuel industry — who need a just transition to real, alternative livelihoods.
And even the polluters, who are not yet acting and paying sufficiently, and for whom the price they must pay will only go up. After all, we know the conclusions of the IPCC’s Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C and we all know that the cost of action will increase as the problem itself grows (and pretending the report doesn’t exist won’t change it).
You didn’t think that just because we’re now 12.5 months away from the year 2020, that the issue of pre-2020 climate action would go away, did you? That you could wait it out, until we’re all safely in the era of Paris? That’s not going to happen, and so there’s even the High-Level part of the pre-2020 stocktake taking place today.
ECO has suggestions for the many Ministers we hope will attend this event and engage in constructive discussions on how to close the pre-2020 ambition gap, and, in the process, build the trust we need for pre-2020 action by developed countries to work as a foundation of post-2020 engagement. This is particularly important considering the action we are expecting from developing countries under Paris.
Thus, please consider that while a case can be made that the financial target of mobilizing US$100 billion in finance by 2020 is on-track, according to the dodgy accounting of the OECD, there are still not enough signatories to the Doha Amendments to the Kyoto Protocol (you can look back to ECO last week for some of those paradoxes) and many countries are not on track to meet their 2020 mitigation targets. However, since the 2020 targets were first set and the iNDCs lodged, the world has changed in many interesting ways. Financial flows are being redirected, technology has been developed, non-state and sub-state actors are leading the way, and green innovation is part of the mainstream economy. These are making it easier for national governments to increase their ambition. Lastly, the pre-2020 stocktake will provide important input into the Talanoa Dialogue process, on the question of “Where are we?”.
ECO helpfully also has thoughts on what a COP24 outcome on pre-2020 could look like. To be balanced and ambitious, it must contain several points on enhancing pre-2020 action, as part of a package also containing meaningful paragraphs on the IPCC report, Talanoa Dialogue, COP24 Finance Ministerial, and a reference to the 2019 UNSG summit. 1/CP.24 should welcome the outcome of today’s pre-2020 stocktake, and also recognize the critical shortfall in climate action in the pre-2020 period, and the need for scaled up finance and support. It should call for developed countries to urgently meet and exceed targets, and for all countries to work together on cooperative action, drawing inspiration from the likes of the International Solar Alliance and the Africa Renewable Energy Initiative. It should urge countries to ratify the Doha Amendment. It should recognize the role of non-state actors and bottom-up initiatives such as the Marrakech Partnership for Global Climate Action, the Global Climate Action Summit, as well as the UNFCCC’s technical examination processes (which ECO would like to remind you all, opened up the climate negotiations to discussions around how to actually increase climate action out there, in the sectors where we find the solutions).
----
Are We Being Gaslit On Loss and Damage?
There are several ways to make a person doubt themselves. One insidious way to do it is gaslighting: psychologically manipulate someone, or a group of people, making them question reality, and even their own sanity. We’ve seen examples of such behaviour from the Trump.
Within the climate negotiations we have our own set of gaslighters. Developed countries have raised hopes to engage in serious work on progressing on loss and damage finance first at Warsaw (“enhancing action and support”), and secondly at Paris (“enhance support on a cooperative and facilitative basis”). The french capital is also where countries agreed that loss and damage was a stand-alone element of the Paris Agreement - important enough for its own article.
Yet, in every negotiation rich countries gaslight us. They’ve claimed that loss and damage is “under” adaptation, that it is not important enough to provide finance in addition to adaptation (square brackets everywhere), report on that finance and assess it as part of the Global Stocktake or the enhanced transparency framework. Ignoring L&D would prevent us from having a full picture of the reality of climate impacts and needs but also actions taken to address irreversible impacts. Isn’t this what the Global Stocktake is all about?
This reinvention of reality is designed to make us question our own sanity. Well, we’re watching you, developed countries. L&D is not (the hallucinogenic) LSD. We’re exposing your refusal to seriously tackle vulnerable countries’ needs for loss and damage finance and ECO will continue to do our share to fight this. Finally, we know that most of you have repeatedly expressed you commitment to implement the Paris Agreement, so we also expect you not to stand side by side with those who spread doubts over the urgent need to act on the climate crisis and who distance themselves from the Paris Agreement.
----
Fossil of the Day - USA
Introductions can be kind of important, don’t you think?
We use them to connect to people in a “Hi, how are you?” way, or in documents to give a sneak peek at what the text has in store for the reader. Sometimes they are relevant in treaties... Wait, just sometimes? That can’t be right.
Saturday’s fossil went to the US for rejecting the inclusion of human rights and other elements of the preamble of the Paris Agreement in the Paris Rulebook.
On Friday, in the APA discussion on agenda item 3, the US challenged the inclusion of a reference to the preamble, saying it was attempting to operationalize something that by definition wasn’t operational. We’re not the only ones perplexed by this, right? Parties should know that preambles and the important framing words they contain are integral to treaties. This one, in particular, happens to house the agreement that Parties will respect, promote, and consider human rights. The US legal gymnastics to exclude the preamble suggests a hidden intention: further sidelining human rights from climate action. But every country at COP has existing human rights obligations, so the Preamble isn’t new or additional. And all 184 Parties to the Paris Agreement should respect, promote, and consider rights obligations in climate action.
This argument, coming from the US, on the eve of the 70th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, is especially ironic. In case the US delegation in Katowice has forgotten, it was the United States and Eleanor Roosevelt who fought for the Declaration in 1948. Oh, how far the United States has fallen: from once being on the frontlines of the Human Rights movement, to now arguing that they should be excluded from the rules guiding implementation of the Paris Agreement. What would Eleanor say?
----
Dear Parties…
Dear ECO: We’ve been coming to UNFCCC meetings for 24 years, but we still are not on track to stop climate change. Why is reaching our climate goals so hard?
– Sincerely, Parties to the UNFCCC
Dear Parties,
It is pretty hard to fight anything with one arm tied behind your back. How do you expect to adequately cut emissions without also addressing the primary source of the problem: the production of oil, gas, and coal?
For many years, Parties have admirably worked to reduce the demand for carbon-emitting fossil fuels through policies like promoting energy efficiency, electrifying transportation, encouraging the growth of renewable energy, and more. These are all smart moves, but all the while you've been leaving the supply of fossil fuels up to the market. Talk about doing things the hard way!
It is Economics 101: Markets are created by the intersection of both supply and demand, so cutting the demand for fossil fuels while continuing to increase the supply just makes the fossil fuels cheaper. Perhaps, it’s time for you to also start cutting carbon at the point of extraction?
ECO has noticed that some clever countries have already figured this out on their own. New Zealand, France, Belize, Costa Rica, and Spain are all at various stages of addressing the need to restrict exploration and production of fossil fuels. These policies are far from perfect in many cases, and should continue to be improved to address more extraction and protect climate-vulnerable communities and workers – but they are a crucial step in the right direction.
When you consider the big picture, we think you will agree. Putting limits on fossil fuel extraction – or “keeping it in the ground” – is far from a radical demand. It is a core requirement for success.
Over 500 civil society groups have signed onto the Lofoten Declaration, a joint call on fossil fuel-producing countries to address fossil fuel supply and embark on a managed decline of extraction and a just transition.
If Parties are intrigued to learn more, we have an excellent opportunity for you to do so today at the “Fossil Fuel Phase-Out and a Just Transition” event.
Sincerely,
ECO
----
Incorporating Human Rights in Climate Action Should be a Piece of (Birthday) Cake
Seventy years ago the world came together following the devastation of the second world war, one of the worst human rights atrocities of our time, and adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) to ensure that egregious human rights violations would never be repeated on such a massive scale! Today we are facing a different, but equally existential and calamitous crisis: climate change.
ECO is concerned that as we celebrate UDHR’s 70th anniversary, Parties inside the Spodek have forgotten what happened 70 years ago and the commitments they made in the UDHR. Over the last few days, we’ve witnessed Parties cutting out references to human rights across different parts of the rulebook. On this Human Rights Day, it feels wrong to see draft texts that exclude human rights, the rights of indigenous peoples, gender equality, public participation, food security, just transition, ecosystem integrity and protection of biodiversity, and intergenerational equity.
It does not have to be. ECO wants to remind Parties that it is not a tradeoff between ambition and the Paris Agreement rulebook. ECO was extremely disappointed at Parties’ unwelcoming stance to the IPCC 1.5 report because we can all agree that increasing ambition is necessary. Successful climate action requires integration of human rights. Climate change is already impacting, and will continue to impact, all human rights. Incorporating rights leads to better action, can help achieve the below 1.5° goal, and is a matter of survival.
We can’t let the 70th anniversary go by without making significant progress on ensuring rights-based and people-centered implementation of climate action by increasing ambition to stay below 1.5ºC, ensuring equity, and incorporating human rights fully in the implementation guidelines.
For governments, recommitting to human rights and ensuring their integration in the Implementation Guidelines should really be just a piece of (birthday) cake!
----
--
Andrés Fuentes
-- CAN-talk Listserv | CAN-...@listi.jpberlin.de | https://listi.jpberlin.de/mailman/listinfo/can-talk | Emails received through CAN-talk are confidential and should not be circulated beyond CAN members unless otherwise stated. -- Subscribe to CAN's ECO Newsletter @ http://climatenetwork.org/eco-newsletters --
Climate Action Network-International (CAN)
Skype: samaparodia
tsh...@climatenetwork.org
https://www.facebook.com/tatiana.shauro.3
www.climatenetwork.org
www.facebook.com/CANInternational
Twitter: @CANIntl
Subscribe to the ECO newsletter: http://climatenetwork.org/eco-newsletters
------------- * ENWL * ------------
Ecological North West Line * St. Petersburg, Russia
Independent Environmental Net Service
Russian: ENWL (North West), ENWL-inf (FSU), ENWL-misc (any topics)
English: ENWL-eng (world information)
Send information to en...@lew.spb.org, enwl...@lew.spb.org, en...@lew.spb.org, en...@lew.spb.org
Subscription, Moderator: vf...@lew.spb.org or en...@enw.net.ru
Archive: http://groups.google.com/group/enwl/
Additionally: http://www.enwl.net.ru/
(C) Please refer to exclusive articles of ENWL
-------------------------------------