“We need to significantly increase the pace of work.”
Urgency is the name of the game in a briefing document released by Sarah Baashan and Jo Tyndall, diplomats charged with running UN climate talks in Bonn next week.
The 8-pager is intended to focus minds ahead of the next round of talks on making the Paris Agreement a reality, which start in Bonn on April 30.
Amid the quagmire of acronyms and diplomatic speak it’s clear four issues require resolution at a global level by 2020, when countries need to submit new CO2 reduction goals.
-What are the Paris Agreement’s rules, or teeth?
-Are developed countries doing their bit?
-Is there enough money for developing countries?
-How can the Talanoa Dialogue boost ambition?
And it’s clear that if we see no resolution or progress on these issues, then getting governments to the stage where they are happy to make tougher commitments will be problematic.
That became evident at the 2017 UN talks in Bonn, where poorer countries legitimately asked wealthier nations to deliver on promises to raise finance and emission cuts by 2020.
This lack of trust between the developed and developing world is not new — but many had hoped the Paris Agreement had smoothed the waters. Not so.
Easing these concerns is critical: as the Carbon Brief graphic below illustrates, the UN is now on a tight timeline. 2018 offers a chance to build a trampoline. In 2019 the world has to jump.
It’s likely the spectre of an increasingly hostile Trump administration hovering over talks, and a recalcitrant Poland hosting them later this year will provide a sombre backdrop.
But this isn’t really about the US. As at the recent UN shipping and climate talks at the IMO, Washington will find itself outnumbered if it tries to take a wrecking ball to Paris.
The real powerhouses are the European Union, UK, Canada, New Zealand and an alliance of small island and climate vulnerable states facing off the big emerging economies.
For the former to prevail they need to convince developing nations that they will deliver on finance, technology and support to nations hit by extreme weather.
This is about maintaining momentum, confidence in a growing low carbon economy, a sense that despite a turbulent couple of years in global politics the Paris Agreement is on track.
Let’s start with the rulebook
This is the teeth of Paris. It’s how it will be enforced. It’s the integrity of a global regime.
You need global rules. They will offer businesses certainty that they are backing the right horse (i.e. low carbon). And they need bite.
We need to know how CO2 emissions will be accounted, the metrics used and clear and comprehensible reporting systems.
The world’s financial hubs already cope with a myriad of currencies, so variations on a country-by-country basis could work.
But it must be clear how much each country is emitting, and a rulebook must ensure these carbon footprints be adequately compared over time.
Think of a marathon. Same distance. Same road. Usually have 3–4 different starts for varying abilities. In time everyone converges. Everyone eventually runs the same race.
Amid the debates that will rage in Bonn over a new reporting system we should recognise that much of this is not new.
For example, the carbon tracking organisation CDP already assesses CO2 emissions from 3500 of the world’s largest companies equalling roughly 20% of global emissions.
Around 50 cities in rich, poor and emerging economies are starting to track CO2. It’s by no means a complete picture, but allied to national reports to the UN, it’s hardly an alien phenomena.
Some may stumble. But there is usually support on the way in the form of food, drink and cheerleaders.
Credible cheerleaders are key, as the UN note makes clear, urging progress on “specific examples that could inform the development of provisions to give flexibility for those developing country Parties that need it in the light of their capacities.”
Are wealthy countries delivering?
This is a tough nut to crack but it’s vital.
Rich nations promised to pick up the slack on climate finance, emission cuts and investments in new energy and climate resilience measures in developing countries pre-2020.
As the former UN climate chief Christiana Figueres said this week, “whether we will achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement largely depends on the investments in the next two years.”
But are they delivering? The national plans under Paris are lodged and for the most part are well off the 2C target, let alone 1.5C. Around a third of what is required, according to UNEP.
Some nations are working on 2050 goals. The UK recently announced it would explore a new target in line with 1.5C. Business has made commitments, the rise of renewables is meteoric.
Michael Liebreich, founder of BNEF, explains the surge in tech development in a recent blog, where he predicts wind and solar will generate over 30% of global electricity by 2040.
“Wind, solar and battery costs will continue to fall faster than any mainstream energy forecasters expect, and there is nothing that makes me think President Donald Trump will succeed in his attempts to revive coal.”
But how can this be best explained in a way that underlines the progress that is being made while emphasising the huge leap that still has to take place?
The 2014 UN climate talks in Lima saw the launch of what was called the NAZCA portal, where businesses, cities and other ‘non state actors’ could record their achievements with the UN.
At the 2015 summit in Paris the role of states and business was given its own ‘pillar’ — with mayors and corporate leaders invited to explain why they wanted a global climate deal.
Given cities and business are likely to move faster than national governments, what’s required now is a form of radical transparency across sectors to total up what’s happening.
The IPCC’s 1.5C UN climate science report will — to an extent — do this, but who is actively adding up sector-by-sector contributions?
Show me the money
Is there any money left in the climate pot? That’s the question developing countries want answered as the 2020 deadline for $100 billion a year to be raised by rich nations draws near.
The most recent study adding up all forms of climate finance was published by the Climate Policy Initiative (CPI) win October 2017. Here’s what they found:
“Climate finance flows reached a record high of $437 billion dollars in 2015, followed by a 12% drop in 2016 to $383 billion, although still higher than flows in 2012 and 2013. Taking into account annual fluctuations, the average flows across 2015/2016 were 12% higher than during 2013/2014.”
Now — it’s important to recognise this figure does not mean the $100 billion target has been met. According to CPI:
“At approximately 10% of overall public flows, international finance from donor governments and their agencies to developing countries stayed constant throughout 2014–2016 at $14 billion.”
There is not widespread agreement of what counts in the $100 billion target. A report from the UK and Australian governments in 2016 was more optimistic on meeting the goal.
It cited an OECD study that estimated public support from donor countries at nearer $40 billion a year, and included the amounts that cash leveraged in its final total.
What we do know is that money is flowing at increasing levels. Rich countries are still not doing enough — as an April 2018 Christian Aid report emphasised — but they appear to be trying.
The Indian-led International Solar Alliance, G7 Risk facility, Uk and Germany-backed Centre for Global Disaster Protection and Powering Past Coal Alliance are examples of initiatives gathering support fast.
What’s more, the Green Climate Fund set up as a result of there Paris Agreement — and capitalised to the tune of $10 billion — is getting its act together, approving projects worth $1 billion in March.
The 2018 review / Talanoa Dialogue
Finally to the 2018 trampoline — which needs to deliver in order for countries to ensure climate commitments through 2019 and 2020 reach new heights.
Think of this as your annual review with your manager. Sometimes awkward. Some employees won’t want to take part. Others will substitute progress with pages of waffle.
Still — this is an important global review which will really get kick-started in Bonn. As the Fijian presidency of the UN process writes in a note published this week:
“Participants will… be encouraged to reflect… where they are, where they want to go and how will they get there.”
It continues:
“Good stories and inputs will be essential for a successful dialogue as they will provide the basis for the discussions at the political phase.”
It’s a space for the world to talk progress and a platform to showcase latest renewable energy, EV and adaptation technologies that will give governments confidence that there are answers to questions over financing an energy transition, power security and building a new grid.
At a guess it will likely say — when we have a summary in COP24 — we’re not on track, 1.5C still possible but fading, resilience needs work, certain sectors are struggling.
It’s also likely to point to vast levels of investment in low carbon infrastructure, the decline of coal in many economies, the rise of electric transport and the slew of work among business and cities.
Knowing where you’re going is half the challenge in the climate game: if Talanoa can shine a light — it will have done its job.
