TRANSCRIPT: U.S. OFFICIALS BRIEF REPORTERS AT CLIMATE-CHANGE CONFERENCE
USIA
05 November 1998
TRANSCRIPT: U.S. OFFICIALS BRIEF REPORTERS AT CLIMATE-CHANGE CONFERENCE
(Emphasis is on emissions trading, flexible mechanisms) (2740)
BUENOS AIRES -- The United States delegation to the Fourth Conference
of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change (UNFCCC) held a Nov. 4 press conference to field questions
about progress on reducing greenhouse-gas emissions that cause global
warming.
Assistant Secretary of State Melinda Kimble, head of the U.S.
delegation, and Ambassador Mark Hambley, special negotiator for
climate change, briefed reporters.
Following is the transcript of the Nov. 4 press conference:
(begin transcript)
U.S. Delegation to the UNFCCC Conference of the Parties-4
Press Briefing
Buenos Aires, Argentina, November 4, 1998
Melinda Kimble, Head of Delegation/Assistant Secretary of State
Ambassador Mark Hambley, Special Negotiator for Climate Change
Buenos Aires, Argentina
November 4, 1998
RADIO CANADA: I would like to know what are the points under bilateral
discussions. I know there are some problems with some people in the
European Community don't want the permit to go through, there is this
thing with China, what are the main areas you are discussing right
now?
MS. KIMBLE: Well, I think there are a number of categories of
discussion. First of all, there is discussion on the implementation of
commitments under the Convention. This is taking place to some extent
under the Subsidiary Bodies on Implementation where they are looking
at Article 4 under the Convention and discussing issues from 4.2 (a)
and (b) which is Review of Adequacy of Commitments, to 4.8 and 4.9
which looks at issues of how to help least developed countries and how
to help other countries with adaptation and mitigation problems due to
climate change. So this is one set of discussions going on. There is
another set of discussions going on through an Ad Hoc Contact Group
dealing with flexible mechanisms, which is actually working, I think,
very constructively to take a step-by-step approach to setting up or
elaborating the flexible mechanisms.
It's important to realize the Kyoto Protocol establishes four flexible
mechanisms. Some people don't realize that because the fourth
mechanism only applies to the European Union. But the first mechanism,
of course, is international emissions trading which is discussed in
Article 17. The next mechanism is Joint Implementation, Article 6, and
finally, the Clean Development Mechanism which permits investments in
non-Annex I countries for certified emission reduction units to be
earned by the parties to the investment; and that permits the
activities to go forward in a very big way in developing countries if
we structure this mechanism correctly. All these mechanisms are under
discussion right now, but actually Ambassador Hambley may have more to
add.
AMB. HAMBLEY: Thank you, Melinda. Let me just say that this morning's
discussion in the Joint Session of SBSTA (Subsidiary Body for
Scientific and Technological Advice) and the SBI (Subsidiary Body for
Implementation) dealt with the emissions trading and the other
flexibility mechanisms. I think if you were in the room, I think you
probably heard ad infinitum a whole list of countries who gave their
positions on these various mechanisms. I think there was a very
fruitful discussion, one in which various new ideas were thrown out,
some of them rather controversial, such as a proposal on the part of
several African countries to somehow make adaptation available not
only in CDM but also available in the mechanisms of joint
implementation and emissions trading as well. But in addition to that,
it gave us an opportunity, the United States, to enforce our
long-standing views on the necessity to have these mechanisms as fully
open as possible, transparent, and without limitations. It also gave
the possibility for the European Union to make a similar presentation
in their view that you must have emissions limited by quantitative and
qualitative measurements, and also spoke in terms of some kind of
concrete ceiling. That said, both the European Union and the United
States also emphasized that we wanted to make sure that this meeting
was one where there was productive dialogue. Both the European Union
and the United States, as well as other countries, pointed out that we
recognize that our differences in approach to these mechanisms, and we
did not want to use this meeting as one in which we engaged in combat
over those particular aspects. We wanted, in turn, to focus on those
areas of convergence and to try and find ways of building on those
areas of convergence where we can move forward and establish some
progress from this meeting.
QUESTION: (Inaudible....) In your opinion, Ambassador Hambley, because
by not being an Annex member they could then be a receiving
participant of the CDM and the credits attached to CDMs?
AMB. HAMBLEY: Certainly it is in the interest of all parties to this
Convention to have Turkey enter into the Convention as a full
participant, as a full party. And it is certainly a goal of the United
States to find a way that Turkey can indeed join the Convention. I
must say Turkey has since 1992, since it was entered into Annex
I/Annex II, at its own request I might add ... early on it took the
position that in fact it should not be a member of Annex I/Annex II,
and it has indeed endeavored under the Convention process to try and
find a way in which it could withdraw from those Annexes in order for
it to present the Convention to its parliament for ratification. That
has not been possible. I think it was indicated in the floor debate on
this item today that several countries frankly came out very strongly
against allowing -- I think two countries actually came out against
allowing Turkey to withdraw from those Annexes. I think the European
Union and the United States both believe it's necessary to give Turkey
more time to try and find a way which will allow for a peaceful
resolution of this item, and I believe a proposal will be made this
evening in the SBI to permit that. What we would want to do is give
Turkey as much time as it needs in order to permit it frankly to find
a way to join this Convention as a full-fledged member.
VOICE OF THE MEDITERRANEAN RADIO/MALTA: At a seminar organized by the
electricity industry yesterday evening, there was great support from
that industry for including the building of nuclear power stations in
developing countries as one possible thing that you could do through
the CDM or under JI. My second question is a repeat of the question I
asked Vice President Gore in Kyoto -- are you discussing with other
donor countries to the World Bank that major funders, the
reorientation of World Bank lending policies away from the
overwhelming emphasis at present on fossil fuel-based energy
production.
MS. KIMBLE: Well, first of all, I think we are at very preliminary
discussions of what projects are going to be eligible for CDM credits.
I think from an objective point of view we have to look very carefully
about the issue of nuclear power because it produces no greenhouse
gases. But nuclear power has other issues connected to it that are
both environmental and safety-related and so it is not necessarily
good to take one option and then find yourself with another kind of
problem. So I don't think we've made a complete judgement on that but
we do recognize the contribution certain nuclear power generation
facilities can make to reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the
electricity area.
We have been working actually with a number of major shareholders in
the World Bank to develop an approach on reducing investment in fossil
fuel use. And the World Bank is also looking at how you invest in
clean fossil fuel projects. Clearly in many areas, coal is an
investment that is going to continue to be made, people are going to
exploit coal fired plants in the near and medium term. So if they are
going to build these plants, we have to find a way to make them clean
and we are working very closely with the World Bank on these issues.
Mark?
AMB. HAMBLEY: I think that's a good answer.
AUSTRALIAN MEDIA: There is, I believe, a joint paper being prepared
under the Umbrella Group on the flexible mechanisms. I don't know if
it's finished yet or if it's still being completed, but whatever. Are
you able to present the highlights of that paper?
AMB. HAMBLEY: The Umbrella Group of countries, an informal grouping
established at Kyoto which consists of Japan, the United States, New
Zealand, Australia, Canada, Iceland, Norway, Ukraine and the Russian
Federation, has indeed worked very, very hard over the past few days
to try and develop a paper which we hope will help further our
discussions overall on the flexibility mechanisms. We have completed
this paper. It's going to be released this evening at the Contact
Group on the Flexible Mechanisms. We earlier today briefed it with the
European Union in terms of what we call a Common Interest Group, which
is an informal gathering of all the countries of Annex I for various
discussions about aspects of these negotiations. I think that the
general reaction which we have received thus far is that it is a
helpful document. Certainly from our viewpoint it does crystalize a
lot of our thinking in terms of what we would like to see in terms of
the steps for joint implemention, the international emissions trading,
and the Clean Development Mechanism, certain aspects we would like to
see formulated in terms of a decision to move our process forward as
we move on beyond COP-4.
NPR/LIVING ON EARTH: Can you tell me if you are having bilateral
negotiations with the OPEC nations over the issue of compensation, and
if you are, can you say a little bit about that?
MS. KIMBLE: Well, certainly we are not having bilateral negotiations
on this issue. This issue is coming into discussion under the rubric
of Articles 4.8 and 4.9 which talk about mitigation, adaptation, to
the effects of climate change and also talk about dealing with
problems that may arise from countries that lose export revenues due
to what we call response measures. We have a very strong opinion that
the latter is much harder to delineate than the former. Many of our
Annex I or Common Interest Group Partners share these views, and there
certainly is no real scope I would say for a bilateral negotiation
because we believe that this issue is not clearly spelled out as one
that needs immediate decision.
AMB. HAMBLEY: If I may just add a brief note on that. There is a
Contact Group, as you know, which has been established to monitor this
aspect of our discussions, and in fact, to come up with a decision. It
was created in Bonn last June and has been resuscitated at this
session. It is under the co-chair of Iranian Ambassador
(SOLOMAT/phonetic) as well as the Swedish Ambassador to the
Environment (BOLSHELLANE/Phonetic), a very distinguished and able
negotiator in the Environment ... they had a long session yesterday
and they will meet again sometime later this week.
REUTERS: I was just wondering if it would be possible for wording in
the Protocol to be structured in such a way that developing countries
that accepted projects under the CDM whether the wording would make it
such that the countries accepting these are making a commitment to the
Protocol. In other words, if country X accepted a project, their very
acceptance would under the Protocol represent their commitment to the
Protocol and thus circumvent all kinds of issues that we've been
talking about.
MS. KIMBLE: You can join our negotiating team. (Laughter.)
AMB. HAMBLEY: I think in terms of adding language to the Protocol
that's not possible without amending the Protocol. The Protocol has
been negotiated. In terms of decision, which is I think probably where
your question is directed -- decision which might be worked out
regarding the CDM, anything is possible but that, of course, will take
consensus from the group of 165 countries who are negotiating. And I
think that at the present time that would probably be unlikely that
that kind of a phrase would be possible. Certainly something to keep
in mind, however.
MS. KIMBLE: I think, though, it is important to add that for countries
to participate in CDM, it is quite clear they need more capacity. They
need capacity in project design, they need capacity in understanding
the measurement, monitoring and verification issues that are related
to how you earn certified emission reduction units under the CDM. I
think there's a lot of work to be done in this area and so, in a
sense, there has to be a partnering between developed and developing
countries before you can even begin.
NHK JAPAN BROADCASTING: I understand that meeting, well what they call
informal consultations, has started today among developing nations and
how did the U.S. get involved in this process and is there any
possibility that they are going to have an informal consultation as a
whole, as a group? Are they going to have any kind of group meeting in
the near future?
MS. KIMBLE: I think you are much better infomed than we are. There was
a lot of bilateral discussion today about many, many subjects. And I
think it is clear that the President of the Conference has made clear
to everyone her intent to hold informal consultations, but we have not
been consulted on those.
QUESTION: I am hearing that there would be a proposed, or accepted, a
3 percent tax on the value of the CER as such, so that we would have
some effect on the Clean Development Mechanism as one of those three
flexibility tools. Are you hearing other (inaudible) ... for the
purpose of going into an adaptation fund, a global kind of insurance
program for populations as such to adapt. Are you hearing other talk
about other taxation modes for the other flexibility mechanisms like
the JIs and the emissions trading?
MS. KIMBLE: Well, first of all, I think it's very, very unlikely that
we are going to see any kind of global tax. I think it was very clear
in the negotiations of the Clean Development Mechanism that the idea
was the certified emission reduction units would be shared, and a
share of the proceeds -- in other words, maybe 2 percent of the
certified emission reduction units available in a project, would be
banked in a fund for adaptation and mitigation. So, a very simple way
of thinking about it -- let's say there are 600 tons in this project
and the parties decide they will share 300 to each party, the investor
and the country involved. And they would take maybe 10 of those tons
and bank them toward use by countries working on mitigation and
adaptation problems. Then the Executive Board of the Clean Development
Mechanism would market in effect these certified emission reduction
units to realize funds so that they could invest in project
activities. But there's no tax involved. It's all integral to the
savings generated by the Clean Development investment. Mark?
AMB. HAMBLEY: I would just add that at this morning's session of the
joint SBI and SBSTA, there was a delegation speaking on behalf of a
group of countries which did suggest that there should be a way found
in which proceeds for adaptation will be not only available through
the CDM, but would also be available through joint implementation and
emissions trading. It was just a proposal made in an intervention,
something that would have to be brought up later on in negotiating
session. I think we are quite a long ways before we are really get the
details of that proposal, but it is something which has been
mentioned, it is something in the corridors you hear a little bit
about.
MS. POVENMIRE: Thank you. I would like to close with one
administrative note for your planning purposes. The U.S. Delegation
will be conducting a press briefing every evening of this session of
the COP in this room at 7 p.m. Thank you.
(end transcript)