Reports from Bali
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| Louisville Climate Action Network |
This page was most
recently updated on
13 Dec 07.
recently updated on
13 Dec 07.
Art Williams, the director of Louisville's Air Pollution Control
District, is in Bali, Indonesia, representing the National
Association of Clean Air Agencies (NACAA) at the United
Nations conference for constructing efforts to build upon the
Kyoto Protocol. Read Art's third report below:
District, is in Bali, Indonesia, representing the National
Association of Clean Air Agencies (NACAA) at the United
Nations conference for constructing efforts to build upon the
Kyoto Protocol. Read Art's third report below:
So, how are the climate change negotiations going in Bali? Well, don't hold your
breath. Negotiators came close to pulling an all-nighter Tuesday night, finally
breaking at 2am. It now appears it will be up to the high-level ministers who
rolled in today (Wednesday) to see what can be salvaged in the remaining days.
But, despite enormous pressure from multiple directions (many governments,
scientists, citizens, even business and industry) precious little progress is actually
being made--yet.
The only notable clear progress has been the creation of an Adaptation Fund to
become operational in 2008 under the auspices, at least initially, of the World
Bank, to channel developed country money to impacted (developing) countries.
There are lots of details to be worked out--like how much money (estimates go as
high as a need for $50 billion a year). But it will start low, grow slowly and maybe
eventually reach a meaningful amount. I'm guessing the rules will be very hard to
craft.
But, it's clear that adaptation has arrived as an essentially co-equal partner to
mitigation.
There are two current, substantial stumbling blocks to further progress in the
effort to craft a "Bali Roadmap"--reduction targets and technology transfer.
Suffice it to say, the US (ably aided and abetted by Japan and Canada) has
resisted the move toward a clear, significant target reduction level for the post
Kyoto time frame. However, there's clearly a huge consensus, based in large part
on the IPCC 4th Assessment Report, that there needs to be a target of a 25-40%
reduction below 1990 levels by 2020 to keep the warming at or below 2 degrees C.
So far, the US ain't buying it. But, my money is on that level of reduction being
where the next agreement will end up--albeit fought by the current US
administration. The world in this arena seems to be willing to put its
chits on the near certainty of a more accommodating US President on or about
January 20, 2009.
So, it seems that we're likely to leave Bali without the desired progress on this
most key issue. (By the way, despite Bush's efforts to pull the rug from under
there being a next "Kyoto Protocol"-like, top-down international agreement, I
sense nothing else in the works. Also, it certainly seems that the current targets
in the leading proposed US federal legislation dovetails nicely with this 25-40%
range--not a coincidence I think.
As to technology transfer, how, you might ask, could there be many credible
challenges to technology transfer (helping get modern technologies to the
developing world)? Well, a funny thing happened on the way to the Patent
Office...the protection of intellectual property(IP) (read this as protecting the
profits from IP) seems to be a key sticking point. Also, who pays for the
transfers and other thorny issues have blocked agreement, thus far, on this key
area.
Another notable areas I'd like to highlight are stronger efforts by the parties to
more closely link trade, development and climate change policies. There was an
informal meeting of top trade ministers this past weekend here who focused on
how to better align international trade policies with climate change goals. One
interesting outcome from those discussions was a proposal to lift tariffs and
other similar barriers to 43 categories of products or commodities the wider use
of which would help climate change--like wind energy products. But, predictably, a
tough issue that arose is the current US tariff on the importation to the US of
ethanol from Brazil (the US imposes a 54 cent per gallon tariff).
Also, there is growing international discussion on aligning poverty eradication goals
with climate change goals. Everybody's for eliminating poverty right? Right?
Well, not exactly. Unfortunately. Anyway, a key point being that as the standard
of living rises, as well it should, per capita energy use will rise--and that's where
it gets sticky and thorny and complex. Some, in the climate change arena, want to
effectively limit per capita energy use as a mechanism to reduce emissions. But,
others have a hard time squaring that with poverty elimination goals. So it's an
important area of policy that won't be easily moved forward.
As indicated, the high-level ministers arrived today (Wednesday) and began their
work--begining with the important rhetorical flourishes at the start. (Though,
there was some somberness as the recent tragedy in Algiers was noted where
several UN staff were killed).
The assembled masses were clearly deeply moved by the presentation by the head
of the Conference, Yves De Boer, who noted the substantial convergence of
science and policy on climate change and quoted Lincoln (nice touch) as having said
that a country "...cannot escape the responsibilities of tomorrow by evading them
today," earning a substantial round of applause.
He was followed by the new Prime Minister of Australia, Kevin Rudd, a new crowd
favorite. (His nation had been the only other holdout besides the US. The first
thing he did immediately after he was election Prime Minister last week was sign
the Kyoto Protocol.). He noted that climate change is the greatest moral and
economic challenge of our age, the defining issue of our generation and that we are
custodians not only of the planet but also of the planet's future. He noted
Australia's new commitment to reduce GHGs by 60% below 1990 levels by 2050,
to get 20% of its energy from renewable sources by 2020 and to implement a
trading regime by 2010. He also strongly asserted that all developed countries
must accept binding targets for the post Kyoto time-frame. These
announcements were all met with extremely enthusiastic applause.
I have more from Tuesday's side events but in the interest of (your) time I'll
bump a report on those to the next posting.
breath. Negotiators came close to pulling an all-nighter Tuesday night, finally
breaking at 2am. It now appears it will be up to the high-level ministers who
rolled in today (Wednesday) to see what can be salvaged in the remaining days.
But, despite enormous pressure from multiple directions (many governments,
scientists, citizens, even business and industry) precious little progress is actually
being made--yet.
The only notable clear progress has been the creation of an Adaptation Fund to
become operational in 2008 under the auspices, at least initially, of the World
Bank, to channel developed country money to impacted (developing) countries.
There are lots of details to be worked out--like how much money (estimates go as
high as a need for $50 billion a year). But it will start low, grow slowly and maybe
eventually reach a meaningful amount. I'm guessing the rules will be very hard to
craft.
But, it's clear that adaptation has arrived as an essentially co-equal partner to
mitigation.
There are two current, substantial stumbling blocks to further progress in the
effort to craft a "Bali Roadmap"--reduction targets and technology transfer.
Suffice it to say, the US (ably aided and abetted by Japan and Canada) has
resisted the move toward a clear, significant target reduction level for the post
Kyoto time frame. However, there's clearly a huge consensus, based in large part
on the IPCC 4th Assessment Report, that there needs to be a target of a 25-40%
reduction below 1990 levels by 2020 to keep the warming at or below 2 degrees C.
So far, the US ain't buying it. But, my money is on that level of reduction being
where the next agreement will end up--albeit fought by the current US
administration. The world in this arena seems to be willing to put its
chits on the near certainty of a more accommodating US President on or about
January 20, 2009.
So, it seems that we're likely to leave Bali without the desired progress on this
most key issue. (By the way, despite Bush's efforts to pull the rug from under
there being a next "Kyoto Protocol"-like, top-down international agreement, I
sense nothing else in the works. Also, it certainly seems that the current targets
in the leading proposed US federal legislation dovetails nicely with this 25-40%
range--not a coincidence I think.
As to technology transfer, how, you might ask, could there be many credible
challenges to technology transfer (helping get modern technologies to the
developing world)? Well, a funny thing happened on the way to the Patent
Office...the protection of intellectual property(IP) (read this as protecting the
profits from IP) seems to be a key sticking point. Also, who pays for the
transfers and other thorny issues have blocked agreement, thus far, on this key
area.
Another notable areas I'd like to highlight are stronger efforts by the parties to
more closely link trade, development and climate change policies. There was an
informal meeting of top trade ministers this past weekend here who focused on
how to better align international trade policies with climate change goals. One
interesting outcome from those discussions was a proposal to lift tariffs and
other similar barriers to 43 categories of products or commodities the wider use
of which would help climate change--like wind energy products. But, predictably, a
tough issue that arose is the current US tariff on the importation to the US of
ethanol from Brazil (the US imposes a 54 cent per gallon tariff).
Also, there is growing international discussion on aligning poverty eradication goals
with climate change goals. Everybody's for eliminating poverty right? Right?
Well, not exactly. Unfortunately. Anyway, a key point being that as the standard
of living rises, as well it should, per capita energy use will rise--and that's where
it gets sticky and thorny and complex. Some, in the climate change arena, want to
effectively limit per capita energy use as a mechanism to reduce emissions. But,
others have a hard time squaring that with poverty elimination goals. So it's an
important area of policy that won't be easily moved forward.
As indicated, the high-level ministers arrived today (Wednesday) and began their
work--begining with the important rhetorical flourishes at the start. (Though,
there was some somberness as the recent tragedy in Algiers was noted where
several UN staff were killed).
The assembled masses were clearly deeply moved by the presentation by the head
of the Conference, Yves De Boer, who noted the substantial convergence of
science and policy on climate change and quoted Lincoln (nice touch) as having said
that a country "...cannot escape the responsibilities of tomorrow by evading them
today," earning a substantial round of applause.
He was followed by the new Prime Minister of Australia, Kevin Rudd, a new crowd
favorite. (His nation had been the only other holdout besides the US. The first
thing he did immediately after he was election Prime Minister last week was sign
the Kyoto Protocol.). He noted that climate change is the greatest moral and
economic challenge of our age, the defining issue of our generation and that we are
custodians not only of the planet but also of the planet's future. He noted
Australia's new commitment to reduce GHGs by 60% below 1990 levels by 2050,
to get 20% of its energy from renewable sources by 2020 and to implement a
trading regime by 2010. He also strongly asserted that all developed countries
must accept binding targets for the post Kyoto time-frame. These
announcements were all met with extremely enthusiastic applause.
I have more from Tuesday's side events but in the interest of (your) time I'll
bump a report on those to the next posting.
| Keep Louisville Cool! |