Matt McGrath BBC 9 Dec 18;
Attempts to incorporate a key scientific study into global climate talks in Poland have failed.
The IPCC report on the impacts of a temperature rise of 1.5C, had a significant impact when it was launched last October.
Scientists and many delegates in Poland were shocked as the US, Saudi Arabia, Russia and Kuwait objected to this meeting "welcoming" the report.
It was the 2015 climate conference that had commissioned the landmark study.
The report said that the world is now completely off track, heading more towards 3C this century rather than 1.5C.
Keeping to the preferred target would need "rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society". If warming was to be kept to 1.5C this century, then emissions of carbon dioxide would have to be reduced by 45% by 2030.
The report, launched in Incheon in South Korea, had an immediate impact winning praise from politicians all over the world.
But negotiators here ran into serious trouble when Saudi Arabia, the US, Russia and Kuwait objected to the conference "welcoming" the document.
Instead they wanted to support a much more lukewarm phrase, that the conference would "take note" of the report.
Saudi Arabia had fought until the last minute in Korea to limit the conclusions of the document. Eventually they gave in. But it now seems that they have brought their objections to Poland.
The dispute dragged on as huddles of negotiators met in corners of the plenary session here, trying to agree a compromise wording.
None was forthcoming.
With no consensus, under UN rules the passage of text had to be dropped.
Many countries expressed frustration and disappointment at the outcome.
"It's not about one word or another, it is us being in a position to welcome a report we commissioned in the first place," said Ruenna Haynes from St Kitts and Nevis.
"If there is anything ludicrous about the discussion it's that we can't welcome the report," she said to spontaneous applause.
Scientists and campaigners were also extremely disappointed by the outcome.
"We are really angry and find it atrocious that some countries dismiss the messages and the consequences that we are facing, by not accepting what is unequivocal and not acting upon it," said Yamide Dagnet from the World Resources Institute, and a former climate negotiator for the UK.
Others noted that Saudi Arabia and the US had supported the report when it was launched in October. It appears that the Saudis and the US baulked at the political implications of the UN body putting the IPCC report at its heart.
"Climate science is not a political football," said Camilla Born, from climate think tank E3G.
"All the worlds governments - Saudi included - agreed the 1.5C report and we deserve the truth. Saudi can't argue with physics, the climate will keep on changing."
Many delegates are now hoping that ministers, who arrive on Monday, will try and revive efforts to put this key report at the heart of the conference.
"We hope that the rest of the world will rally and we get a decisive response to the report," said Yamide Dagnet.
"I sincerely hope that all countries will fight that we don't leave COP24 having missed a moment of history."
Climate talks pause as battle over key science report looms
FRANK JORDANS, Associated Press Yahoo News 10 Dec 18;
KATOWICE, Poland (AP) — A diplomatic standoff over a single word could set the stage for a bigger showdown during the second half of this year's U.N. climate summit.
Negotiators took time out Sunday to rest after the first week of talks ended on a sour note the previous night, when the United States sided with Russia, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait in blocking endorsement of a landmark study on global warming.
"I think it was a key moment," said Alden Meyer of the Union of Concerned Scientists. "The fact that a group of four countries were trying to diminish the value and importance of a scientific report they themselves, with all other countries, requested three years ago in Paris is pretty remarkable."
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's special report on what would happen if average global temperatures rise by 1.5 Celsius (2.7 Fahrenheit), and how to ensure they don't go higher, was widely regarded as a wake-up call for policy-makers when it was released in October .
As diplomats wrapped up a week of technical talks Saturday, almost all 200 countries present in Katowice, Poland, had wanted to "welcome" the IPCC report, making it the benchmark for future action.
But the U.S. and three other delegations objected.
"The United States was willing to note the report and express appreciation to the scientists who developed it, but not to welcome it, as that would denote endorsement of the report," the U.S. State Department said in a statement. "As we have made clear in the IPCC and other bodies, the United States has not endorsed the findings of the report."
Russia, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait also called for the study to be "noted" but not "welcomed."
While none of the four-oil exporting countries spelled it out, their objection to the report likely included its suggestion that fossil-fuel use needs to be phased out by 2050. Oil, gas and coal are major sources of carbon dioxide, which traps heat in the atmosphere.
The 2015 Paris agreement set a target of keeping global warming well below 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 Fahrenheit), ideally 1.5 C by the end of the century.
"A 1.5 C and a 2 C worlds are very different in terms of mean climate, extremes, sea level rise, and climate-related risks," said one of the report's leading contributors, Valerie Masson-Delmotte.
The higher threshold increases the likelihood of "climate change hot spots challenging basic water, food, economic security and the risk of irreversible loss of wildlife," she said.
Observers at the talks said the two Gulf countries' objection to the IPCC report came as no surprise.
"The Saudis with their sidekicks the Kuwaitis have long been troublemakers in this in this process," said Meyer, who has followed international climate negotiations for many years.
Russia's intentions were unclear, he said, while the U.S. position appeared to be driven by what he called President Donald Trump 's "cavalier attitude toward science in general and climate science in particular."
"It's really an embarrassment for the world's leading scientific superpower to be in this position of having to disbelieve a report that was written by the world's scientific community including a large number of pre-eminent U.S. scientists," Meyer said.
Saturday's floor fight casts doubt on whether countries will be able to reach consensus on important issues by Friday, including the need to step up national targets to curb carbon emissions.
While many countries are sending ministers or even national leaders to the talks, the U.S. and Britain are among the countries that will be represented only by bureaucrats.
