COP Updates
IETA Warsaw Brief
IETA

IETA Special Report

 

27 November 2013

In this Issue

  1. Introduction and Overview
  2. ADP Update
  3. Climate Finance
  4. REDD+
  5. Market Mechnisms
  6. Milestones

IETA Events in Warsaw

IETA in the Press

More Details

IETA - Climate Challenges, Market Solutions

24, rue Merle d’Aubigné
CH-1207
Genève, Switzerland
secretariat@ieta.org
+41 22 737 05 00

IETA Warsaw COP 19 Brief

COP 19 showed us that much more work is needed to make the links between finance and markets in order to spur private sector investment onto a 2 degrees pathway

The 19th Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP) and the 9th Conference serving as the Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (CMP) were held in Warsaw, from 11-22 November (although it spilled over to Saturday 23 November). This was also the 2nd official meeting of the Ad Hoc Working Group for the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action (ADP). The first week of the negotiations also saw the 39th meetings of the Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI) and Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA) convene. Both the SBI and the SBSTA continue to be technical forums to work out the details of UNFCCC architecture on issues as far ranging as market mechanisms, adaptation and REDD+.

More Drama and Tension than a ‘normal’ COP

The talks took place against a difficult background. Typhoon Haiyan had just struck the Philippines when the meeting began, while Australia’s government – supported by Canada – stated it would not begin to contribute to the Green Climate Fund and consequently began efforts to repeal its carbon pricing programme. During the opening plenary of the talks, the Filipino lead delegate announced that he would fast; ideological divisions between developing and developed countries couldn’t have been starker this year.

By the end of week one, Japan became caught up in a media frenzy when it announced it would weaken its 2020 emissions target from a 25% below 1990 goal to a 3% increase above 1990 levels, blaming the loss of nuclear power generation post Fukushima – although speculation is this was a ploy to force the nuclear debate at home. This overshadowed its earlier pledge of $16 billion for climate finance by 2016. This leaves Japan as the only Annex 1 country under the Kyoto Protocol to actually decrease its emissions reduction goal – and in fact reverse its first commitment period cuts.

Efforts intensified in week two, with significant progress for REDD+ on both technical assessment (an achievement given much contention throughout the years) and financing, which boosted sentiment amongst various delegations. On Saturday afternoon, after more than 30 hours of non-stop negotiations, ministers achieved a breakthrough in the ADP talks, closely followed by agreements on financial arrangements. With these two agreements on the ADP and finance in place, the COP was finally able to close.

The main outcomes from COP 19 included:

  • An agreement to table post 2020 emissions reduction contributions by Q1 2015
  • Agreement on the Warsaw Framework for REDD+ finance
  • Establishment of the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage
  • Finalising the institutional arrangements between the Green Climate Fund and the COP

The work on a framework for various approaches and new markets got caught up in a procedural quagmire, leaving a disappointing result of no texts and no decisions.  While Warsaw failed to set up a testing platform for how a future framework would operate, the topic will be picked up in the June intercessional talks.  Still, the commitment to market mechanisms was ever-present at the COP – in sessions on progress in China, California, Quebec and the EU, to name a few.  These domestic efforts will have increasing influence international negotiating positions in the run-up to Paris in 2015.

These are analysed in more detail below, as well as some of the areas where agreement could not be reached and more work is needed. For a full list of the final texts and decisions adopted in Warsaw, please see http://unfccc.int/2860.php; this will be updated in the days to come with the final versions.

Durban Platform for Enhanced Action (ADP): Inching towards the 2015 Agreement in Paris

After a marathon negotiating session, spanning more than 30 hours, Parties finally reached a deal on an ADP text in the afternoon of Saturday, 23 November. Talks had stalled over the use of the word ‘commitments’ in paragraphs 2b and 2c, which was ultimately changed to “contributions”, with the following caveat: “without prejudice to the legal nature of the contributions”.

Opposition to including a deadline in paragraph 2b, calling for said contributions to be tabled by the first quarter of 2015, was defeated, although the final wording was tweaked to read that this deadline applies to “by those Parties ready to do so”, from an earlier draft of “those Parties in a position to do so”. The information to be provided in these proposals will be determined at COP 20.

Green NGOs reacted to the compromise with outrage, concerned that the substitution of ‘contributions’ for ‘commitments’ could be read as watering down the text and possibly reversing the Durban pledge for all countries, developed and developing alike, to take action to restrain emissions from 2020. Green groups have described the outcome as “a mixed bag”, but there seems to be acceptance that – while far from perfect – the compromise at least keeps the show on the road. It remains unclear what the ramifications of ‘contributions’ will mean-and how it will be interpreted in political capitals—particularly Washington, Beijing and Brussels.

It is also worth noting that the US was a big proponent of the Q1 2015 deadline for targets, to allow ample time for review by all stakeholders and any revisions needed. On the domestic front, this deadline also fits in with the quadrennial energy review underway, which will inform President Barack Obama’s climate plan, announced in June 2013. One of the three main themes of the plan is to lead international efforts to fight climate change.

One of the most significant paragraphs for business in the ADP text is 5c, which encourages governments to promote the voluntary cancellation of certified emission reductions (CERs) “without double counting, as a means of closing the pre-2020 ambition gap”. This is a major step towards bringing the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) into the new deal under the UN climate convention and not confine it to just the Kyoto Protocol, where it is currently housed. IETA’s interpretation of the inclusion of this clause in the ADP text is that it may reflect tacit approval by all countries that the CDM will play an important role in achieving mitigation in the pre and post-2020 periods.

This also tallies with an EU position throughout the two weeks, to use the CDM to achieve net mitigation and not just offset developed country emissions. The decision is at odds with one in Doha last year, to restrict access to CERs to just Kyoto Protocol participants, but that is no bad thing for the carbon market, given the current lack of demand for CERs. It could also position the CDM to form a part of emerging emissions trading programmes in host countries, such as China, Chile and Mexico, among many others.


Finance: Still the most contentious issue at UN climate talks

Climate finance, which continues to be a hot-button issue, saw a notable package emerge from Warsaw. Until the bitter end, developing countries urged developed parties to establish clear mid-term finance pledges and milestones towards mobilizing the $100 billion by 2020 – but, with the exception of an additional $6 billion pledged in Warsaw, clear mid-term finance commitments and timelines didn’t materialize.  

The “Finance COP” did, however, result in critical decisions that should provide guidance for Parties to go from Warsaw to Paris – including decisions related to the Green Climate Fund (GCF), the long-term finance plan, loss and damages, and REDD+.

On the Green Climate Fund (GCF), institutional arrangements were finalised between the GCF and the COP. Initial capitalization for the GCF is expected to begin next year.

As mentioned above, Parties were not able to come to a clear road-map for long-term finance (LTF). Warsaw’s LTF Work Program decision underscores the need for developed countries to “maintain continuity of mobilization of public finance at increasing levels from fast-start finance period…from a wide range of sources, public and private, bilateral and multilateral, including alternative sources, in the context of meaningful mitigation actions and transparency of implementation”.

The decision also recalls that a significant share of new multilateral funding for adaptation should flow through the GCF, and it requests developed nations to prepare biennial submissions on updated strategies and approaches for scaling-up climate finance from 2014 to 2020. Finally, Parties have decided to convene a biennial High-Level Ministerial Climate Finance Dialogue, starting in 2014 and ending in 2020.

Warsaw’s decision on the Standing Committee on Finance (SCF) report resulted in COP’s endorsement of SCF’s Work Plan for 2014-15, while taking note of SCF’s planned 2014 activities related to the biennial assessment and overview of climate finance flows. COP 19 also took note of SCF’s report on its inaugural stakeholder folder, co-organized by IETA and the World Bank and held on the margins of CARBON EXPO 2013 in Barcelona. The group now turns attention to organizing its 2nd Annual SCF Stakeholder Forum (likely late-spring 2014) – an event where IETA could again be in a position to support the Committee on building private sector elements into the forum agenda and/or targeting private sector participants/speakers.

Loss and damage made substantial progress this year, with a ‘Warsaw Mechanism for Loss and Damage’ approved by the COP. Financing for this mechanism remains an open issue, but an institutional framework and independent executive body will start to take shape next year. Loss and damage for countries most vulnerable to the effects of climate change will now have a permanent place for discussion and finance under the UNFCCC.


REDD+: Years of hard work led to the ‘Warsaw Framework for REDD+ Finance’

Negotiators also agreed the Warsaw Framework for REDD+ finance, completing several years of work and backed by $280 million of support from the UK, Norway and the US. The final text allows for a rigorous, transparent framework for measuring emissions reductions from reduced deforestation, along with how safeguards for the environment and livelihoods can be met. This progress paves the way for future REDD+ public-private funding and could pose as a step in the right direction towards future market-based approaches for supporting finance on REDD+.

It takes a results-based finance approach, with cash distributed once developing countries have demonstrated reduced emissions from deforestation providing they submit additional information on safeguards  – such as livelihood preservation and biodiversity – for local communities: key to ensuring the transparency and integrity of REDD+ investments.

Accompanying this was a broader text outlining the modalities for the measuring, reporting and verifying of emissions removed by forests/land-use projects. However, it notes that additional verification procedures could be overlaid for “results-based actions that may be eligible to appropriate market-based approaches that could be developed by the Conference of the Parties”.


Market Mechanisms: More work needed before 2015

This COP did not produce a serious package of decisions on markets, despite the Polish Presidency highlighting that this would be a ‘markets COP’ earlier this year.

A mandated review of the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) modalities and procedures was not completed, with negotiators blaming the loss of time in June 2013 (when a procedural spat with Russia over decision making under the UNFCCC delayed work). This review has been deferred to COP 20, although will be discussed at SBI 40 in June before then.

Prior to the negotiations next June in Bonn, the UNFCCC secretariat will prepare a technical paper by 19 March, tackling:

  1. Membership and composition of the CDM Executive Board (e.g. including the private sector or civil society on the CDM Executive Board)
  2. DOE (third party validation and verification firms) liability to compensate for CER issuances arising from significant deficiencies in validation, verification or certification reports
  3. Programme of Activities (PoA) provisions
  4. Crediting period duration (e.g. making the CER crediting periods shorter for certain project types)
  5. Additionality requirements
  6. Elaboration of the role of Designated National Authorities (DNAs)
  7. Simplification and streamlining of the CDM project cycle for certain project types

As for annual guidance to the CDM Executive Board, it too is lacklustre. While governments noted their concern with the low CER price and the knock-on effect on institutional capacity, paragraphs that could have paved the way for more demand – such as inviting the Green Climate Fund to use the CDM or, at the very least, its methodologies and allowing for the voluntary cancellation of CERs – were culled.

However, a similar proposal to enable voluntary cancellation of CERs survived in the ADP text (as mentioned above), as a way for governments to ramp up mitigation efforts prior to 2020. As discussed above, this is the first step to bringing the CDM into the Paris deal and not confine it to just the Kyoto Protocol. This is an important development for companies examining long-term commitments to the CDM process and project portfolios.

Perhaps with this in mind, the annual guidance also took incremental steps to make the CDM fit for the future. Decisions were taken to further work on a sustainable development reporting tool for the CDM, and report back at CMP 10 (December 2014, in Lima). The CDM Executive Board has also been asked to continue work on streamlining methodologies for all project types and country-specific baseline and additionality thresholds for sectors in countries that are under-represented in the CDM. It also confirmed that projects cannot re-register once their crediting periods expire.  

The review of JI guidelines was also deferred until next year, with discussion to continue at SBI 40 and a decision to be adopted at COP 20.

In the annual guidance relating to JI, governments also noted concerns about the impact of low prices on the mechanism, echoing the language in the CDM guidance. The text is relatively short, with no great surprises. The main task is for the Joint Implementation Supervisory Committee to elaborate on a proposal to merge its accreditation system for third-party verifiers with that of the CDM.

On the framework for various approaches (FVA), new market mechanism (NMM) and non-market approaches (NMA) – the holy trinity of the 2015 deal – negotiators, ultimately, failed to make any formal decisions in Warsaw, despite the best efforts of the Polish presidency and a willingness by many governments to find a deal.

There seemed to be consensus that the FVA would operate as an information-sharing platform, and towards the end of the first week of the meeting, it looked like there had been a breakthrough on this. However, by the following day, the agreement was off and the FVA/NMM/NMA package was deferred until SBSTA 40, to be held in June 2014.

There was an effort to revive the talks in week two, at a high-level, to facilitate the work in June. After a day of closed-door ministerial discussions, the COP president was forced to abandon efforts once and for all in Warsaw. IETA understands that work on the accounting standards advanced in these talks, however, which is key for the FVA’s comparability function and to ensure environmental integrity and, if so desired, fungibility of units.

IETA also understands that part of the reason the talks stalled was due to resistance by some developing country representatives, who are concerned about the implementation of the NMM before 2020 – despite there being little need for it before the 2015 agreement enters into force. However, it is worth noting that not all developing countries feel this way; indeed, reports are that some are very much in favour of progress on markets overall at Warsaw but are being hampered by their more economically advanced partners. IETA will continue to push hard for decisions to be made on a robust and flexible FVA and NMM—which must form a core part of the 2015 deal.

On the surface, very little was agreed by SBSTA 39 for nationally appropriate mitigation actions (NAMAs), but the three-page text sets out guidelines for the measurement, reporting and verification of NAMAs – although purely voluntary.


2014 Milestones: A make-or-break year for the 2015 Agreement? 

If anything, Warsaw seemed to be the wake-up moment for the ADP negotiations: recognising that so much work needs to be done to ready a negotiating text for circulation in May 2015, and a desperate need to avoid a repeat of the Copenhagen debacle in 2009, the idea of hosting additional meetings next year was floated early on at COP 19. In the end, a high-level ministerial dialogue has been planned to coincide with the SBSTA and SBI 40th meetings in June, and another at COP 20. The planned climate summit, to be hosted by UN secretary-general Ban Ki-moon, in September next year was also noted in the ADP text.

As touched on above, the CDM M&P review will continue at SBSTA 40 in June, with a view to completing the review at COP 20 in Lima, Peru.

Negotiations in 2014 will play out against a backdrop of important scientific announcements: the IPCC Adaptation chapter will be released in March, followed by the economics chapter in April and the synthesis paper in late October. These reports will influence and guide climate envoys as they prepare positions for COP 20 in Lima (December 1-12, 2014) – and possible pledges of “contributions” in early 2015.


IETA IN WARSAW


IETA’s COP 19 Pavilion: A hub for business and markets/finance discussions throughout the 2 weeks

IETA this year teamed with friends and sponsors to host a space inside the main COP venue, where we conducted an intensive series of events. Highlights included:

  • The first business/youth dialogue, looking at how the two communities could work together to effect change. We were encouraged by the endorsement of carbon markets by the youth panellists, who said they recognised that this is one of the fastest and cost-effective ways to tackle climate change. We hope this is the start of an ongoing dialogue between the two sides.
  • UN climate chief Christiana Figueres gave IETA an hour of her time to talk with president Dirk Forrister and answer questions from the audience, covering ICAO’s decision in October to develop a global market-based mechanism, the CDM and the role of business in climate policy formation. She was very optimistic on the future for the CDM and told the audience the mechanism “definitely has a role in the 2015 agreement”. 
  • IETA hosted a high-level side event on reconciling climate policy and challenges linked to competitiveness. The distinguished panel included the UK’s Secretary of State for Climate and Energy Ed Davey, MEP Romana Jordan from the European Parliament’s Environment and Energy Committees, Bill Kyte from E.ON, and IETA’s President and CEO Dirk Forrister. The focus was on finding ways to shape climate policy in such a way that it would work hand in hand with competiveness challenges, with all speakers agreeing that climate policy was not the cause of competitive difficulties that many businesses are currently faced with, and that it could even play a role in improving businesses’ competitive advantage.
  • The same day, we held another high-level event addressing the next steps to reduce aviation emissions, with presentations by MEP Peter Liese, Konrad Hanschmidt from Bloomberg New Energy Finance, Andreas Hardeman from the International Air Transport Association, and Jacob Werksman from the European Commission’s climate division. Liese gave an update on the EU ETS amendment to take into account October’s ICAO decision – and before the end of April 2014, otherwise the legislation applies as initially passed, which would contravene the ICAO agreement.
  • Three experts on China’s emerging carbon market joined Jeff Swartz to discuss the current status and challenges of the pilot emissions trading programmes in China, including: Li Junfeng, Director General of the National Climate Change Strategy Center (part of NDRC); Xueman Wang, Team Lead, World Bank Partnership for Market Readiness (PMR); and Lu Xuedu, Senior Advisor, Asian Development Bank. The discussion highlighted the challenge towards eventually covering emissions across the entire economy, but held out hope that this could be done with the right set of complimentary policies. The panellists said that pilots in Shenzhen, Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangdong will help show other regions how emissions trading can help provincial and municipal governments meet their carbon intensity and energy intensity goals.
  • At the end of week 2, IETA co-hosted a CEO breafast dialogue with the Global Environment Facility (GEF). The roundtable, chaired by GEF’s CEO Naoko Ishii and moderated by IETA’s Dirk Forrister, focused on the vision for expanding private sector engagement on climate through stronger public private partnerships. The interactive gathering served as an opportunity for international business leaders to learn more about the unique role that the GEF (and partner agencies) can play in piloting and validating innovative approaches in the evolving architecture of environmental finance. Specifically, participants were invited to: discuss new low-carbon trends and highlight new needs (eg, the role of insurance in adaptation; how policy uncertainty affects carbon/climate financing); and brainstorm new pathways for financial innovation and new public private partnerships. For more information, or to participate in future activities with the GEF, contact Katie Sullivan on sullivan@ieta.org.

IETA IN THE PRESS DURING COP 19


The IETA Team's Updates from Warsaw and other background documents are available at www.ieta.org/cop19.

The IETA Secretariat will be presenting various in-person and call-in debriefs for members in the coming week. A copy of the slide deck for those presentations is available here.


Should you have any questions on the content of this Brief, please contact IETA’s Brussels office on +32 2 230 1160 or Brussels@ieta.org

 


 
COP 19 Update November 21

Thursday 21 November

It is the final countdown here in Warsaw. The tension is palpable, many doors are closed as bilateral talks ramp up, and sleep is a much sought-after luxury. At the time of writing (9pm CET), IETA has spoken to a number of negotiators who now expect that the talks will run over to at least Saturday, following the time honoured tradition of a COP not finishing on time – watch this space for more developments. It looks like there will be major outcomes here in Warsaw on finance and loss and damage. Details remain murky as Ministers take a fine comb through texts and find consensus—but all signs point to go for more climate finance pledges and mechanisms for loss and damage.

What a crazy couple of days it has been. We reported on Tuesday that talks on the framework for various approaches (FVA) and new market mechanism (NMM) had been deferred until June’s Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA) 40th meeting. By the early hours of Thursday morning, however, there appeared to be a possibility that ministers would try to come to a deal on all 3 of these items in Warsaw – but by lunchtime, it was all off again.

Following us so far?

It is disappointing, particularly as several governments – from a range of different countries and regions – expressed a desire to accelerate progress on the FVA/NMM/non-market approaches discussion at last night’s stock-taking plenary with the COP President. Several negotiators have also told IETA that they genuinely believed that progress on the FVA in particular was achievable here at Warsaw, and there seems to be a number of reasons why these talks didn’t lead to decisions here on the FVA/NMM/NMA. Unfortunately it looks like Ministers will not be able to review these 3 important items that need to have a prominent place in the 2015 Agreement.

As is the norm for this late stage in the COP, the annual guidance to the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) Executive Board also remains unresolved—but it seems like there will be package of texts that will be taken to ministers late into the night tomorrow.

One drama-free area is on guidance relating to Joint Implementation (JI), where a final text was published yesterday for the CMP to adopt. No big surprises, with the main development being approval to merge the accreditation systems for third-party verifiers for the CDM and JI, with a report at SBSTA 40 in June on how to proceed.

On loss and damage, tonight South Africa’s environment minister Edna Molema – who is facilitating the talks – said she was hopeful a deal could be reached, with Bloomberg reporting her as saying: “We can find a landing zone in the little time we have left.” Part of the holdup is a dispute over separating loss and damages from adaptation, which some nations are opposed to in principle.

Governments are also meeting on medium-term finance­ targets, for 2013-16, to ensure that things stay on track to reach the $100 billion by 2020. As is often the case, developing countries are pushing for more cash on the table now and are holding other pieces of the negotiations hostage until this is resolved. It feels like we say this every year.

IETA has learned that efforts are underway to ensure that the limited public funds for this mid-term finance plan are used to leverage private funds, but that more work is needed to develop MRV for climate finance before new pledges are made.

Meanwhile, Ecosystem Marketplace tweeted tonight that a deal on REDD finance has been reached this evening, with a text to follow tomorrow morning.

As for progress towards the 2015 deal, there is a lot of noise and confusion about expectations, particularly with regards to tabling of reduction targets – in what forum, what timeframe, what format. While the EU is reportedly pushing for details ahead of Paris, others are dragging their feet and would rather finalise pledges in December 2015. An approach that worked ever so well in Copenhagen…

However, there is hope that the high-level climate summit which Ban Ki-moon is organising for September 2014 will prompt some countries to table both financial pledges and emission reduction goals. Watch this space.

IETA events at COP 19

IETA’s last event at COP 19 will feature a ‘fireside chat’ with Paul Watkinson, head of the French negotiating team and Dirk Forrister. We hope to hear from Paul how the French government will work with IETA members and the broader business community to make Paris a successful COP.  We’ll begin at 1pm.
 
COP 19 Update November 19

Tuesday 19 November

Week two of the Warsaw talks is off to a busy start, with ministers landing and the red carpet (or, rather, purple carpet) being rolled out in the National Stadium, and the heavy-lifting by politicians is underway.

Sadly, despite high hopes, one topic the politicians will not be touching is the framework for various approaches (FVA) and new market mechanism (NMM) as a request to continue talks this week was denied by the chair of the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA).  

IETA has learned that part of the reason the talks stalled was due to resistance by some developing country representatives, who are concerned about the implementation of the NMM before 2020 – despite there being little need for it before the 2015 agreement enters into force. However, it is worth noting that not all developing countries feel this way; indeed, reports are that some are very much in favour of progress on markets overall at Warsaw but are being hampered by their more economically advanced partners.

But there was good progress made on accounting standards, which are key to ensuring that programmes ‘plugged in’ to the FVA can be compared on a like-for-like basis, have sufficient environmental integrity and any units – if opted for – are fully fungible.

IETA’s side event with the Harvard Project on Climate Agreements and the Enel Foundation on Tuesday addressed different ideas for linking as part of the 2015 deal. Speakers told a packed room of government officials, NGOs, business representatives and UN staffers about the importance of harmonisation, how to link different approaches (eg. a carbon tax with an ETS), and the benefits of linking, among other issues. It was a really good event (if we say so ourselves), with some really interesting ideas that are so relevant to the FVA discussions. Check out the slides on the UNFCCC official side events site

Elsewhere, negotiations on the annual guidance to the CDM Executive Board (EB) were ongoing at the time of writing (Tuesday early evening), with little agreement in sight. This is worrying as it is meant to be the final session. A proposal to introduce a price floor for CERs generated media excitement on Monday (see links below), but by Tuesday morning, it had been dropped. The current text can be viewed here (but is likely to change overnight).

Flashpoints include the section on the voluntary cancellation of CERs, with reports that most of the section is likely to be deleted and only paragraphs pertaining to allowing the transfer of CERs to be cancelled, the issuance of an attestation of cancellation and the technical infrastructure changes required expected to remain.

Negotiations on REDD+ have also stalled, with Papua New Guinea blocking the talks until its proposal to establish a stand-alone, dedicated REDD+ body under the UNFCCC is adopted, the idea being that this mechanism would speed up the flow of investment to REDD+ projects.

On the big picture deal under the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action (ADP), a draft text was published on Monday morning (and can be seen here). Highlights include a call for participating countries to ratify the Kyoto Protocol amendment agreed in Doha last year to implement the second commitment period, scale-up reduction efforts before 2020 and, crucially, affirm commitment to securing a deal at the Paris talks in 2015.

And, just as in between the 2007 Bali COP and Poznan in 2008, it has been proposed that there will be three negotiating sessions next year under the ADP, in addition to the COP in Lima.

 

IETA in the news

Jeff Swartz talks to Reuters about a proposed CER floor price and Bloomberg (terminal only)

Katie Sullivan writes about climate finance for the Environmental Finance COP blog

BusinessGreen on the breakdown of negotiations for the framework of various approaches

More coverage of IETA’s GHG markets report

BusinessGreen on the REDD+ Declaration, launched on 16 November by IETA and partner organisations.

 

IETA events at COP 19

IETA’s side events continue in our room – if you’ve not dropped by, we’re on level -2, zone C4, room 35 – next to the locker rooms. If you’ve not got your ticket for IETA’s members and friends nightcap party on Wednesday night, that’s (another) good reason to visit us.

On Wednesday, highlights include a session about what the EU can learn from other cap-and-trade systems, starting at 9.45am. Speakers include Québec’s director of carbon, a New Zealand delegate from the environment ministry and a representative of California’s EPA. Don’t miss it!

At noon, we’re hosting a closed session about EU ETS reform, for IETA members only, taking stock of reform proposals on the table and the 2030 discussions. After this, we will be holding our AGM from 1.15pm.

Thursday’s highlights include a look at what’s next for ICAO at 11.30am and emissions trading in China at 5pm. We are also hosting a high-level panel looking at climate policy and competitiveness issues, with speakers including the UK’s climate and energy secretary Ed Davey, Romana Jordan from the European Parliament and a representative of the Polish government.

 
COP 19 Update November 17

Sunday 17 November

Week one of COP 19 has come to an end, and as people woke up on Sunday, weary from two mammoth plenary sessions that went on till the very early hours, it quickly emerged that a lot remained unresolved.

The 39th meetings of both the Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI) and the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA) came to a close very early this morning, both with some results – although more concrete decisions would have been better.

In SBI, the CDM modalities and procedures (M&P) review text was adopted as written – in a nutshell, it concluded that more work is needed next year and will resume at the 40th session of the SBI in Bonn in June. Ahead of this, a technical paper tackling the following issues is to be readied by 19 March 2014, with a view to finalising the review of the CDM’s M&P at SBI 41, held in parallel to COP 20 next December in Lima:

  1. Membership and composition of the CDM Exeuctive Board (e.g.including the private sector or civil society on the CDM Executive Board)
  2. DOE (third party validation and verification firms) liability to compensate for CER issuances arising from significant deficiencies in validation, verification or certification reports
  3. Programme of Activities (PoA) provisions
  4. Crediting period duration (e.g. making the CER crediting periods shorter for certain project types)
  5. Additionality requirements
  6. Elaboration of the role of Designated National Authorities (DNAs)
  7. Simplification and streamlining of the CDM project cycle for certain project types

While disappointing, it is not entirely unexpected that the M&P review was not finished here, given that negotiators had to make up for lost time from June’s session which was suspended due to objections by Russia, Belarus and Ukraine on decision making under the UNFCCC. In contrast, IETA is encouraged by the idea of including civil society representatives on the EB remaining on the table.

The review of JI guidelines was similarly deferred until next year, with discussion to continue at SBI 40 and a decision to be adopted at COP 20.

At the SBSTA plenary, on the framework for various approaches (FVA), new market mechanism (NMM) and non-market approaches (NMA), the chairs came under fire for not making the texts available, particularly after late night sessions working on the text. On Friday, the problem of missing texts saw the FVA breakthrough on Thursday reversed.

In the end, the FVA/NMM/NMA package was automatically deferred to the next SBSTA meeting, in June next year. However, it is also being presented to the COP president, who could give negotiators the mandate to continue discussing it under the convention – a move which many support.

IETA in the news

IETA events at COP 19 next week

For those in Warsaw, don’t forget IETA is hosting a series of side events in the IETA Pavilion, located on level -2, zone C4, room 35. A full schedule is available online, and highlights for the next couple days are below.

On Monday, IETA and the BCSE are hosting a GCF and private sector dialogue at 12.30pm, with UK climate minister Greg Barker in attendance. This event is invitation only, so please contact Katie Sullivan for more information if you are interested in attending.

Also on Monday, IETA and the Harvard Project on Climate Agreements, with support from Enel, are hosting an event examining the role of linking in achieving the Durban Platform agreement in 2015. This promises to be a lively session, so please come by – it starts at 1.15pm and is taking place in Room Cracow (Level 2, zone B2).

On Tuesday at 10am, don’t miss IETA and Environmental Defense Fund’s session on the world’s carbon markets. The panel includes Québec’s director of carbon and EDF’s vice-president of international climate.

 
COP 19 Update November 14

14 November 2013

It’s been all systems go for the IETA team these past two days at COP19. Alas, the same can’t be said of certain parts of the negotiations. While IETA and its COP 19 Pavilion partners began a packed schedule of side events on Wednesday (more on this below), little progress has been made on the CDM modalities and procedures review, despite a very thorough – and some say encouraging – draft text following Tuesday’s contact group.

Read more...
 
<< Start < Prev 1 2 Next > End >>

Page 1 of 2
powered by MemberClicks