Out of Copenhagen’s ashes - the smoke begins to clear.
Posted on 09. Apr, 2010 by Joshua Wiese in U.S.A., bits
A few weeks ago, I got word that this project’s funders (the GCCA / TckTckTck)wanted to support a group of ‘Negotiator Trackers’ in Bonn in April. I’ve coordinated this project for little under a year now, and welcomed the news. On short notice, the trackers who were available jumped at the chance to come back to the UN for this first meeting since Copenhagen and get a read on the ashes of last December’s meeting. Everyone hoped to make sense of the aftermath of that moment in our history we’d all spent so much of their time and energy on in 2009.
Among those who couldn’t make the trip was our beloved American, Ben Jervey. Ben, as it turns out, found some paid work. He like the rest of the trackers, volunteered in his Adopt a Negotiator role. This time he wouldn’t be able to make the trip. Since I’m from the States and planned to be in Bonn coordinating, I’ve decided to do my best to track the US delegation in Ben’s stead.
Today is the first day of official negotiations. and the first official negotiations since last December. There’s a lot of sorting out to do - which is what we expect over the next three days of talks.
We left Copenhagen with an accord that saved the talks from utter collapse, but not from falling dangerously short of our objectives to addressing climate change. Whilst more than 120 world leaders were in attendance, the accord was hashed out in series of small, closed door meetings with only a few of those leaders participating. And since being agreed - it’s future remains uncertain.
…
For a great synopsis leading into today’s meeting, check out the audio from this blogger/ media call that I participated in last night.
So here’s what I know going into this. The accord notably agreed:
As a shared goal to curb global warming:
- Countries will work together to keep global warming as far below 2 degrees as possible, with opportunities to re-evaluate the effects of temperature rise, possibly aiming the limit at 1.5 degrees
To get there:
- Countries submitted voluntary emissions reduction targets
To fund the costs of adaptation and mitigation vital to vulnerable developing countries in the face of changes in the climate happening now and unavoidably happening in the future:
- Developed countries collectively pledged $ 30 Billion in short-term finance in the period 2010 to 2012, in long term, $100 Biillion per year by 2020, which is money that would be both public and private, bilateral and multilateral.
To find the money needed to deliver these long-term funding commitments:
- A high level panel was established to study opportunities to raise these funds.
To support projects in developing countries on adaptation, mitigation and capacity building:
- The establishment of a Copenhagen Green Climate fund
All of this is important and substantial, but we have a long long way to go. While in Bonn, thesse are the things, so far, that I’ll be watching for action or discussion on:
We don’t know: how this accord will fit into the two negotiation tracks that have long been established. We don’t know where this money comes from - whether it’s in addition to or competition with aid that’s already been allocated by developing countries to fight poverty and support economic development.
We do know: that the voluntary commitments made by countries are voluntary and still fall far short of enough to actually keep us below 2 degrees of global warming; that there are loopholes in many of the policy mechanisms beling proposed to deliver these emissions reductions, getting us even further from what science tells us is necessary; that $100 Billion dollars, according to expert analysis from development and environmental organizations and the scientific community alike, is not enough to fund what’s necessary in adaptation and mitigation funds….
So in just a few hours time, we start to get answers to all these questions and unknowns. We’ll see what the appetite for bold action to address climate change is like after the negotiations - whether negotiators were as crushed as us activists and advocates following the process. We’ll learn more about the work plan for 2010, leading up to the next Conference of Parties, which takes place in Mexico this coming December -and which countries are positioning themselves as constructive or obstructive players in the process.
It’s going to be an interesting next few days. I’ll keep a close eye on the US Delegation and try to understand my countries position and role in all of this. If you have specific questions that you want me to answer - comment below or send me a message.
I’d like to know how the US came up with the ‘$100 billion’ number. To me it sounds like it’s big enough to sound big, but small enough to still be small. Americans spend that much every year on bottled water!
So I’d like to know what scientific evidence they accepted, and what ethical judgements they made about the impact, that lead to the conclusion that $100 billion would be enough.
Keep up the good work!
You’ll fill in beautifully, Josh. We’re in good hands here, people!