Patrick GALEY, AFP Yahoo News 27 Jun 19;
Bonn (AFP) - Hours of discussions over whether the United Nations climate process needs protecting from big energy interests were "scrubbed" from official conclusions at a conference in Germany this week, AFP has learned.
Talks between nations over how to implement the Paris climate goals wrap up in Bonn Thursday, when summaries of discussions and decisions will be presented to delegates and observers.
Among those allowed to participate in UN climate talks are representatives of trade organisations who count among their members energy giants such as ExxonMobil and Shell.
Industry representatives say their presence as observers at climate negotiations is crucial as it will be the private sector that is tasked with implementing change in the global economy.
Critics question why lobby groups tied to fossil fuel companies should be allowed inside a process that specifically aims to slash the planet-warming emissions those fuels cause.
The UN says that no outside interests influence decisions taken during the climate negotiations, but there is currently no protection against potential conflicts of interest between polluters and policymakers.
Delegates in Bonn this week held five sessions discussing how to enhance the transparency of the UN climate process.
According to observers who were in the room, three of those sessions saw delegations specifically raise the issue of conflict of interest.
The Least Developed Countries negotiating bloc of 47 nations, led by Uganda, submitted a proposal to draw up conflict of interest protections, observers told AFP.
One debate session saw the issue raised by multiple nations, with the United States warning that any attempt to regulate which organisations had access to the talks was a "slippery slope".
Australia and the European Union were supportive of the US stance, according to observers to the talks.
Yet the final draft session notes on Thursday made no mention of conflict of interest nor the hours of discussion on the topic.
"Despite the support from almost 50 countries and environmental groups around the world... obstruction mainly from the US and Australia blocked the establishment of a conflict of interest policy," said Philip Jakpor, from the campaign group Environmental Rights Action.
"These obstructions from countries scrubbed the conclusion notes of any mention of the issue."
He said that "hours of discussions" had not been accurately reflected in the final summaries.
- 'Mosquitos to malaria' -
The Paris agreement does not mention fossil fuels but a recent landmark report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said the safest way to slash emissions would be a rapid and widespread phaseout of oil, gas and coal.
Jakpor said having groups representing oil majors at the talks was allowing those companies undue influence on nations' plans to green their economies.
"For those of us from African countries where you have malaria -- you don't bring the mosquito to lead the taskforce," he said.
The final text from the UN said countries identified ways "to further enhance the openness, transparency (and) inclusiveness" of the climate talks.
Jesse Bragg, from the Corporate Accountability watchdog, told AFP that the discrepancy between discussions and the official conclusions was an example of "corporate capture" at UN climate talks.
"How can we ever expect to adequately respond to this crisis if even mere discussion about the role of industry fuelling it is censored?"
UN climate talks: Delegates back IPCC report without targets
Matt McGrath BBC 28 Jun 19;
UN delegates in climate talks have agreed a "compromise" on how to include a key scientific report after two weeks of talks in Bonn, Germany.
Negotiators decided the report represented the "best available science".
But they have not included any targets on emissions researchers said were vital to keep temperatures in check.
Some smaller island delegates claimed the move amounted to a surrender to fossil fuel producers.
Several wore T-shirts with the slogan "Science is not negotiable".
The arguments here have focused on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the report it produced last October on how the world would cope with a temperature rise of 1.5C this century.
The scientists concluded that it was possible to keep below this mark, but it would require huge cuts in emissions over the next years, with the world getting to net zero by 2050.
For small island states, who believe that they might cease to exist if temperatures go above this level, the report was seen as key to their survival.
But major fossil fuel producers were very wary. In December, the US, Russia, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait declined to welcome the study into the UN process.
That battle continued here in Bonn.
Small island states wanted to approve a text that would include reference to the scientists' conclusion that carbon emissions would have to be reduced by 45% by 2030.
However, Saudi Arabia has been to the fore in wanting to include text that underlined the uncertainties in the report.
For the group of around 40 small island states, this has proved inflammatory.
"Disregarding or qualifying the best available science is tantamount to climate denialism," said Ambassador Lois Young from Belize, who is the chair of the Alliance of Small Island States.
"We must not permit even a whiff of denialism in the multilateral process. We must use the IPCC Special Report on 1.5 to operationalise the Paris Agreement," she said in a statement, referring to the 2016 international accord on climate change.
However rather than have a full scale war on the floor of the conference centre, a compromise text was agreed. The report was considered, the parties' exchange of views was noted and the IPCC were thanked for providing the "best available science."
For many attending, this fell well short of what was needed.
"The IPCC 1.5 report is a milestone report and we should welcome it, accept it and not negotiate it," said Ian Fry, the lead negotiator from Tuvalu.
"This report, for countries like my own, indicates the threats that we face. We faced existential threats from climate change."
Observers were also unimpressed by the actions of the Saudis in pushing so hard to underline the uncertainties in the report.
"During the negotiations, Saudi Arabia blocked substantive discussions called for by a large number of vulnerable developing countries on the IPCC report," said Alden Meyer from the Union of Concerned Scientists.
"But while they may have succeeded in short-circuiting formal discussion of the report, the Saudis can't prevent scientific fact from continuing to drive the heightened awareness among governments, the business community and the public of the need for an urgent response to the climate crisis.
It's been a difficult week for many delegates here seeking rapid action on climate change. Apart from the row over the IPCC, there were concerns that the G20 meeting in Japan would also see a downgrading of commitments made to support the Paris climate agreement.
The EU was also under fire for its failure to agree a net zero emissions target for 2050.
Perhaps the one bright spot for the many glum attendees here was the fact that UK became the first major global economy to pass a net zero emissions law.
The battles on the role of science in the UN climate process are also unlikely to go away anytime soon. With two more IPCC reports due this year, there will be more rows down the road.
"It's a battle that was lost but not the war," said Yamide Dagnet, a former UK climate negotiator now with the World Resources Institute.
"We just have keep being creative. Our children are giving us lessons about that."
UN climate talks limp to close as Europe sizzles
Patrick GALEY and Laure FILLON, AFP Yahoo News 27 Jun 19;
Bonn (AFP) - Amid soaring temperatures and the direst warnings yet over the threat from global warming, nations were set to wrap up UN climate talks on Thursday with meagre progress in the plan to avert climate disaster.
The annual UN negotiations in the German city of Bonn come in the midst of a Europe-wide heatwave and have exposed deep fissures between rich and developing countries on a number of contentious issues.
Here are three key takeaways from the talks:
- Science dispute -
Countries are devising ways of making good on what they promised in the 2015 Paris climate deal, which aims to limit global temperature rises to 2.0 degrees Celsius (3.6 Farenheit).
A landmark report last year by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said that a safer cap of 1.5C rise would preferably see nations rapidly slash planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions via a sharp drawdown of fossil fuel use.
The Paris deal obligates nations to negotiate based on the "best available" science.
But some high-polluting nations, led by Saudi Arabia, have questioned the IPCC's findings, leading to angry exchanges in closed-door talks in Bonn.
Observers told AFP that the Saudi delegation reacted furiously to a suggested text proposed by moderators that welcomed the IPCC science.
They said it also objected to the mention of specific IPCC emissions targets.
One draft text contained language proposed by Saudi and US delegations casting doubt on the IPCC's findings, and warned that such uncertainty could hamper decision-making at a political level.
The latest draft, seen by AFP, contains no mention of specific emissions targets and merely "noted" the heated debate.
Mohamed Adow, climate head at the Christian Aid campaign group, said the UN process must remain committed to forging policy based on the IPCC's 1.5C aim.
"Our actions to tackle climate change must be informed by the best available science and the best available science is the IPCC report," he said.
- Markets impasse -
One of the stickiest negotiating points of the Paris agreement is the article on how carbon markets are regulated and tracked.
Countries currently may sell emissions savings -- say, from building a hydroelectric dam to reduce greenhouse gases from energy -- to other nations to count towards their own national contribution to climate action.
The Paris agreement calls for a mechanism to guard against practices that could undermine efforts to limit emissions through trading schemes -- including measures to ensure greenhouse gas savings are not double counted by both buying and selling nations.
A major bone of contention is also whether or not emissions credits accumulated by countries pre-Paris could be retained and cashed in in future.
Gry Bossen, policy and volunteer coordinator at Forests of the World, said the issue "could undermine the entire Paris Agreement if strong rules are not created", preventing double counting and guaranteeing equity between rich and developing countries.
- Progress? -
After months of growing protests and civil disobedience from citizens imploring governments to act over climate change, many observers said they were disappointed with the lack of progress in Bonn.
Another source of disunity between richer, big-emitting nations and the developing ones already dealing with the fallout from climate change, is how at-risk countries can be compensated.
So-called "loss and damage" funding was under review in Bonn, but there was no agreement on how to raise the cash.
It is thought that $300 billion will be needed annually by 2030 to help nations deal with climate-related disasters.
"Are we keeping the promise we made in Paris of standing in solidarity with people facing climate emergency now?" asked Harjeet Singh, global climate lead at ActionAid.
