It is no surprise that finance has been pushed to what ECO hopes
is actually the last day of COP22. Until last night, an agreement to
give the Adaptation Fund a future life under the Paris Agreement had not
been found. ECO is well aware of the
question marks many developed countries have about whether (or how) the
Adaptation Fund should serve the Paris Agreement. Well, that can be
sorted. Just decide to work it out. When? Next year.
ECO finds it unwise to leave COP22 without a clear political decision that the Adaptation Fund
will
serve the Paris Agreement. This would be seen as a blow to the spirit
of cooperation and solidarity, which were so eagerly celebrated with the
announcement of the Marrakesh
Action Proclamation. Also the Fund holds significant importance to
many, given the successful delivery of adaptation support.
As if this wasn’t enough for the final finance stretch of COP22,
the long-term finance decision is also still in limbo. While developing
countries are asking for increased adaptation finance, developed
countries want to see their roadmap welcomed,
even if that implies accepting their accounting methodology, which has
considerable gaps. The delivery of the roadmap could be recognised as a
contribution to enhance transparency in how developed countries intend
to meet their US$100 billion goal.
That is, if Parties settle on wording that does not prejudge the
outcome on the accounting modalities. Such recognition should conclude
that planned increases in adaptation finance are obviously welcome,
though balance between mitigation and
adaptation finance have yet to be achieved. Developed countries must
enhance their efforts to achieve that balance. Job done. What are you
waiting for?
0.1%
This week, ECO saw some developed countries and regions finally
making pledges to the Adaptation Fund. This unique instrument has served
an important niche function in the landscape of financing for climate
adaptation efforts in vulnerable countries.
In the context of some Parties hemming and hawing about whether the
Adaptation Fund should be continued, these pledges confirm what ECO and
others have known all along: the Adaptation Fund is relevant and
necessary. So ECO extends kudos to Germany, Sweden,
Italy, and the Walloon and Flemish Regions of Belgium.
While cheering the $80 million committed to the Adaptation Fund
this week–reaching the Fund’s fundraising goal for COP22 –it's
important not to lose track of the broader perspective. There is a
growing gap between pledged adaptation finance
and science-based estimates of adaptation finance needs. The
recent United Nations Environmental Program Adaptation Finance Gap
Report estimates that $56-73 billion are needed for adaptation in
developing countries annually now, rising to $140-300 billion
in just 13 years.
ECO reminds Parties here on the last day of the “Africa COP” that
current pledges to the Adaptation Fund–although most welcome–will
contribute to plugging a mere 0.1% of the adaptation finance gap. ECO
urges developed country Parties to mind
this gap by stepping up with pledges closer to the scale of the problem
when planning future budgets for adaptation support.
The Great COP24 Swap
Hosting
negotiators in Bonn in 2017 is a creative solution to facilitate Fiji’s
COP23 Presidency. ECO is very much looking forward to the leadership it
knows Fiji will
bring to this role. While reduced capacity in Bonn might prove
challenging, we trust that logistical hurdles will be leaped to ensure
that civil society participation is not a casualty of the workaround.
Looking
ahead, we see that an Eastern European country is scheduled to take
over as President for COP24. Indeed, Poland, having hosted in Warsaw in
2013 and Poznań in
2008, has expressed interest in putting recent COP experience to use in
2018.
ECO
notes that this would mean 4 of 6 COPs between 2013 and 2018 being
hosted in Europe. We anticipate huge political momentum for increasing
Paris Agreement ambition
at the 2018 Facilitative Dialogue. Regional swaps have occurred for
past COPs. COP24 might be the right moment for a country outside of
Europe to take the Presidency and showcase its leadership abilities.
Where’s Al the Finance Gone? Straight to Fossil Fuels
In
Marrakech, adaptation finance has remained a sticking point between
Parties. When it comes to adaptation finance, wealthier countries have
continued their common
refrains: “There’s just not enough public money”;“Our cupboards are
bare”;“It’s complicated”. The Africa Adaptation Initiative has yet to
find any developed country willing to support it, a state of affairs
made even sadder by the fact that Marrakech is an
African COP
According
to Parties’ own biennial reporting, G7 governments plus Australia are
providing roughly $3.4 billion per year in public finance for adaptation
activities in
developing countries. In contrast, these same governments are providing
nearly $67 billion per year in subsidies and public finance to support
oil, gas, and coal production, both domestically and abroad.
Yes,
you read that right – the G7 plus Australia are giving nearly 20 TIMES
as much public money to fossil fuel companies as they are to support
adaptation in developing
countries. ECO wonders why are these countries are buying more
flamethrowers when the world is already burning.
This
hypocrisy is not going unnoticed at COP – see Japan’sFossil of the Day
for its high levels of fossil fuel finance. As indicated in the UNEP
Adaptation Finance Gap
report, there’s no shortage of need for investment in
climate-resilient, low-emission infrastructure. If governments want to
be seen by their peers as taking the Paris Agreement seriously, they
need to stop funding fossils and start funding climate solutions.
On
the positive side, this means that as governments continue to line up
with the Paris Agreement, shifting money away from fossil fuels and
aligning financial flows
with low-emission development, tens of billions of dollars in public
money will be freed up and will need a new home.
Fossil of the Day
The first Fossil of the Day award goes to...take a deep
breath...Turkey, Russia, Australia, New Zealand, France, Japan and
Indonesia for duplicity at the UN climate negotiations. While
representatives from climate vulnerable countries, cities,
businesses, and civil society organisations are fighting to keep dirty
fossil fuels in the ground, as well as preventing the expansion of
polluting airports (hat-tip to France), these countries still aim to
increase their domestic fossil fuel extraction. By
doing so, they are quite literally drilling under everyone’s efforts to
keep global warming below the critical threshold of 1.5°C. These
countries helped forge the Paris Agreement which is now in force,
committing them to halt climate change, so they really
need to get the left hand and the right hand talking to each other. Put
your money where your mouth is, please!
The second Fossil of the Day award goes to Japan for its dodgy
stance on coal. Japan has a crazy number (48!) of new coal power
projects in the pipeline and is funding a massive 10 GW worth of new
coal in Indonesia. On a near-daily basis Indonesian
locals have been protesting against proposed coal operations in the
Cirebon region, concerned about the impact on public health and water
supplies. Unfortunately, the Japanese government and the Japan Bank for
International Cooperation have been blind to these
protests. Time to wake up and smell the smog, Japan!
The third Fossil of the Day award goes to Russia for promoting
nuclear power as a feasible solution to climate change. We all know that
this outdated and risky technology is too slow and expensive to
contribute to climate efforts - and if deployed
will steal away resources needed to develop renewables. Not to mention
the fact that nuclear is not even a zero-emissions technology - it
produces massive amounts of greenhouse gases during the uranium
enrichment. Then, of course, there is the question of
safety. The Russian government really needs to take a look at the
long-term, widespread consequences of the Fukushima and Chernobyl
catastrophes.
Short-Term Targets Have a Gas Problem
As the UNFCCC at last starts to focus more closely on short-term
targets, there is a certain invisible and odourless greenhouse gas that
no one is taking quite seriously enough: methane.
We aren’t just talking about cow farts here. The massive gas
infrastructure that is springing up as the world goes fracking crazy is
not only undermining the communities that live above their subterranean
explosions, but also the world’s ability
to meet any short-term climate goals.
A 2013 study shows that methane is 86 times more potent than CO2
over a 20-year timeframe. Well, in 20 years we’ll be well past UNFCCC
short-term targets
of 2020, 2025 and almost to 2035. Bewilderingly, many governments are
still using the old numbers from the IPCC’s 4th Report from 2007 that
looks at methane on a 100-year timeframe - meaning they are calculating
methane as only 25 times more potent than CO2.
If we are talking about short-term targets, we need to be looking at short-term Global Warming Potentials (GWP) too.
By that math, fracked gas has a short-term climatic impact almost 3
times greater than that of coal! Time to scrap all those new gas
pipelines, LNG terminals, and fracking rigs and start a real transition
to renewables.
As the world approaches dangerous tipping points, we need to be
careful about getting locked into a methane sucker-punch. Hey EU, with
your proposed 77 gas infrastructure projects of “Common Interest,” we’re
looking at you!
A Questionable Inheritance
Commitments made at this COP greatly impact youths. Elements such
as the $100 billion Roadmap, the mid-century goals set out by Parties
and the ambition targets that will influence development pathways for
the future mean it will be up to young
people to implement the outcomes of current negotiations, ensure
proposed funding pledges are met and the CMA will be a constructive
forum.
The young people of ENGO, YOUNGO and all non-governmental
organisations have been pushing our country delegations on a few key
agenda items that have not yet been realised:
First and foremost, to ensure that mitigation targets are met,
Parties must not forget the “well below” in front of the 2 degrees
target. Throughout the week, youth delegates have been pushing for as
many countries as possible to be ambitious
and aim for 1.5 degrees in their Nationally Determined Contributions.
The Adaptation Fund discussion is equally critical: a push for the
fund to serve the Paris Agreement in a transparent and measurable way
will enable those of us who are inheriting the established mechanisms to
properly implement equitable solutions.
Upscaling the fund is going to be vital to protecting livelihoods and
development pathways that will empower future generations.
The youths of ECO hope that the COP22 outcomes will begin to
resolve these issues. We urge delegates to promote ambitious NDCs and
guarantee adaptation financing so that our future can be secured.
Linh Do
Editor-in-Chief, The Verb
Đăng nhận xét