If you play poker you know that all the players have to ante up with a stake before each new deal. You have to “feed the kitty” – or you don’t play. Perhaps not coincidentally, parties that have an interest in a particular project, enterprise or, in the case of COP 15, addressing the looming climate crisis, are called stakeholders. There are over 190 countries, hundreds of NGOs and IGOs, plus an enormous number of media folks who’ll be there – and who have been working hard Log Outto effect a successful conference.
The Commonwealth – formerly known as the British Commonwealth – is a grouping of 54 nations representing two billion of the world’s people. The United Kingdom and Canada are the two G-8 powers among them, and India, Pakistan, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and Malaysia are several of the other most prominent members. The Commonwealth Heads of Government met in Trinidad this past week and declared climate change the “challenge of our time.” Their declaration backs a “…comprehensive, substantial and operationally binding agreement in Copenhagen leading towards a full legally binding outcome no later than 2010.” French President Nicolas Sarkozy, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, and Danish Prime Minister Lars Loekke Rasmussen, all went to the meeting to boost support for Copenhagen. The declaration of the leaders also “…backed the British-led proposal to establish a US$10 billion fund to support developing countries adapt to low-carbon emissions policies,” as reported by the “New Zealand Herald” here.
India, the biggest developing nation in the Commonwealth, and a critical component in the global calculus on climate change, is led by Dr. Manmohan Singh. He met with the UK’s Gordon Brown and with Nicolas Sarkozy in Trinidad. “The Hindu” reported here that “Dr. Singh told them that India had a major stake in the Copenhagen meet and would like to see a ‘balanced, ambitious and equitable outcome’ from it…” Meanwhile, the AFP further reports here that “Singh said on Saturday that India was ‘willing to sign on to an ambitious global target for emissions reductions or limiting temperature increase’ provided developed countries shared in the burden of funding mitigation.”
Singh, as you know, made a state visit to the US last week. In a joint press conference with President Obama, the PM said: “In a few weeks from now, the meeting of the conference of parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change will take place in Copenhagen. Both President Obama and I have agreed on the need for a substantive and comprehensive outcome, which would cover mitigation, adaptation, finance, and technology. We reaffirmed our intention to work to this end bilaterally and with all other countries. We welcome the President’s commitment to a major program for promotion of renewable energy, and I drew his attention to India’s own ambitious national action plan on climate change, which has eight national missions covering both mitigation and adaptation.”
China unveils carbon target for Copenhagen deal is the headline from Reuters last week. Their intention is to cut their “carbon intensity” 40 to 45% by 2020, compared to 2005 levels. What does that mean? This “Q&A” from Reuters notes “Carbon intensity is the amount of carbon dioxide emitted for each unit of economic output.” Is China’s target enough? Reuters put together some comment from experts here. One WWF expert, Kim Carstensen, said: “Given the size of China’s economy, this decoupling of economic growth from emissions is one of the most important factors that will determine whether the world can get on course to keep temperature rises below 2 degrees Celsius.” Another expert, Frank Jotzo from the Australian National University Climate Change Institute, said the Chinese target could be said to be “broadly compatible with other countries’ proposed level of effort” but he also indicated that “…all the targets on the table at Copenhagen fall far short of the reductions that the science is calling for. To reduce the risk of dangerous climate change, they would have to be followed up with far, far stricter targets immediately after 2020.”
I think this is an excellent point, as we’re likely going to be seeing far more of the impacts from the warming that has already been set into motion and, I would like to hope, the collective sanity and will of the world and its policymakers will be more palpable and deeper by that time, and so stronger measures will then be commensurately more palatable and politically feasible – and, I might add, will have already been proven to provide amazing “co-benefits” such as lower energy costs, radically improved energy security, greatly reduced air and water pollution, and smoother running economies owing to significantly less energy price volatility.
The EU was happy about the Chinese announcement as well as the pledges by the US that President Obama would go to Copenhagen and would commit to reductions of 17% by 2020 (mirroring the numbers in the Waxman-Markey bill). EurActiv reports here that EU officials were happy “…but stressed that the commitments had to match the developed world’s ‘common target’ of keeping global warming below 2°C.” This refers to the commitment that was made this past summer at the G-8 Summit to hold the line on an increase in temperature to 2°C above that from preindustrial times.
Meanwhile, in Brazil for meetings on climate change, Nicolas Sarkozy also praised the Chinese and American proposals. This AFP item notes Brazilian President Lula’s call for Copenhagen “…to not neglect the preservation of the planet’s forests and proposing ‘sufficient and adequate’ funding mechanisms…” Here is an analysis from the law firm Baker & McKenzie on Brazil’s recent commitment on reducing its footprint, the most important measure by far being their goal of mandating “…an 80% reduction of deforestation rates in the Amazon Basin and a 40% reduction of deforestation in the Brazilian Savannas.” France and Brazil had earlier announced a joint effort on Copenhagen and beyond. (See this from Reuters.)
Let me wrap this up for now with what Russia has put on the table: to reduce GHG from 1990 levels by 22 to 25% by 2020. This “Factbox”, again from Reuters, notes “Russia is the world’s number three greenhouse gas emitter behind China and the United States.”
Here’s a good graphic for your reference, showing how many of these key economies are doing with their emissions. It’s from AFP, using data from WWF/Allianz/Ecofys.
The US, China, the EU, Russia, Brazil, India, and many others are coming to Copenhagen with their money on the table. They’re coming to play. That’s an excellent sign.
