01 - 12 December 2003, Milan, Italy

Negotiating post-Kyoto: A bridge too far?

Presented by The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI) and the Center for International Climate and Environmental Research - Oslo (CICERO)

Speaking in his personal capacity, C. Dasgupta noted that the UNFCCC entails commitments from developed countries to curb emissions and provide financial and technical assistance to developing countries. He called for a new protocol that would involve both quantitative emissions and financial targets for developed countries, and allow flexibility in choosing an appropriate balance between the two.

Addressing scientific underpinnings that could drive the post-Kyoto process, Rajendra Pachauri, speaking in his personal capacity, emphasized inertia in the climate system. He noted that defining a level of "dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system" involves value judgments. He said a future framework should be equitable, efficient, and based on the UNFCCC's principles.

Noting current emissions trends, Ogunlade Davidson, University of Cape Town, said few Annex II countries will meet their emissions targets by 2012, and observed that excitement for the Kyoto Protocol is waning. He stated that developing countries are rejecting commitments because developed countries have failed to take the lead.

Speaking in his personal capacity, Harald Dovland suggested identifying a specific atmospheric concentration level to guide discussions on a post-Kyoto framework. He said the Kyoto Protocol was a small but important step, and recommended retaining its best provisions in future climate policy architectures. He cautioned against stifling creativity by prematurely addressing post-Kyoto architecture in the official climate change negotiations.

Speaking in his personal capacity, Ambassador Raúl Estrada-Oyuela said the intergovernmental climate change process lacks strong leadership. He emphasized that quantified emission reduction targets are unsuitable for developing countries because they entail "grandfathering" allocation and limit growth. He underscored the merits of per capita and sectoral approaches, and opposed emissions allocations based on GDP.

José Romero, Swiss Agency for the Environment, Forests and Landscape, said the UNFCCC and its long-term objective provides a suitable framework for future steps. He called for strengthened cooperation between Parties, particularly on technology transfer.

Cédric Philibert, International Energy Agency (IEA), recommended retaining emissions trading in a future climate change regime because it mobilizes private funding and is environmentally and cost effective. He advocated sector-wide unilaterally funded CDM and non-binding targets for developing countries. Regarding options to reduce cost uncertainties, he identified intensity targets and price caps.

Michael Grubb, Imperial College, emphasized that the current climate change regime is in trouble. He said Kyoto Protocol Parties could move forward with a declaration even without the Russian Federation, suggesting that this would influence the country to ratify. Grubb suggested forming "coalitions of the willing," comprised of those dedicated to achieving progress.

Asbjørn Torvanger, CICERO, outlined options for post-Kyoto architecture and recommended a "global menu approach," where Parties would agree on a menu of options and set negotiated targets, allowing countries to choose from the menu according to their national circumstances. He stressed the need to regularly assess progress and strengthen commitments.

International policy dialogue on vulnerability

Presented by the Delegation of Mexico

Fernando Tudela Abad, Secretary for the Environment and Natural Resources of Mexico, said that the Zacatecas Dialogue was the outcome of an initiative conducted by Mexico and UNDP, aiming to prioritize vulnerability and adaptation under the UNFCCC. He said the Zacatecas Dialogue convened experts from 15 countries in order to share views and national experiences on ways to address vulnerability issues in developing countries. Abad noted that the Dialogue identified the need for developing countries to: restore degraded ecosystems; promote south-south cooperation; improve access to information and technology; promote sustainable means of subsistence; and reduce poverty.
He summarized the recommendations to consolidate a common agenda for developing countries on vulnerability, including: developing liaisons with the Alliance of Small Island States; accessing financial resources; designing and implementing programmes and projects to strengthen preventive and response capacity; and establishing tools to share information and successful experiences relating to vulnerability.

Alvaro Umaña, UNDP, highlighted UNDP's World Vulnerability Report, which provides a comprehensive outline of vulnerability and its linkages to natural events and countries' capacity to respond. He underscored that the longer Parties take to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and address adaptation issues, the more serious the negative impacts of climate change becomes. Umaña said climate change and crisis prevention could be addressed together through government policies, including establishing micro-insurance schemes for the poor, and enhancing early warning systems in developing countries.

The future of the Kyoto Protocol: Alternatives for the second commitment period and beyond

Presented by Fondazione ENI Enrico Mattei

William Pizer, Resources for the Future, noted that the US does not appear to be headed towards mandatory emission limits in the next few years and questioned whether the UNFCCC should continue on its course or adjust accordingly.

Richard Baron, IEA, identified a need for technology transfer to generate political will in developing countries to stabilize and reduce emissions.

Brian Flannery, ExxonMobil, considered whether emissions trading is an appropriate tool for achieving emission reductions. He identified a challenge in cooperating on commitments that address long-term risk, based on more efficient and clean development.

Dan Bodansky, University of Georgia, said that the negotiations have reached an impasse, noting that states representing two thirds of global carbon emissions are unwilling to make binding commitments to limit their emissions. He considered how to create the political will to take action on climate change.

Chris Boyd, Lafarge, noted the need to strike a balance between flexibility and certainty, and stressed that the private sector is better positioned than governments to select the most appropriate technological direction.

Jonathan Pershing, World Resource Institute, stressed the need to fundamentally alter development strategies in order to reduce emissions.

Christian Egenhofer, Centre for European Policy Studies, considered the effects of emissions trading on business.

Carlo Carraro, Fondazione ENI Enrico Mattei, identified characteristics of alternative architectures to the Kyoto Protocol, including moderate short-term goals and market mechanisms and incentives for participation and compliance.

Discussion: Participants discussed how to improve the architecture of climate policy, and considered possible alternatives.

CDM: Power for the people

Presented by the UNFCCC

Joke Waller-Hunter, UNFCCC Executive Secretary, noted that the CDM is a promising new vehicle for financing innovative projects that can advance sustainable development, and reduce global environmental risk and poverty.

Bjøern Stigson, World Business Council for Sustainable Development, highlighted the importance of empowering local communities and meeting their energy demands in order to alleviate poverty.

Georg Børsting, CDM Executive Board member, highlighted that the Board has approved nine baseline methodologies and more methodologies are in the pipeline to be assessed.

Tod Johnson, World Bank, noted the importance of power generation in meeting energy needs in developing countries for carrying out a variety of activities.

Luiz Pinguelli Rosa, Electrobras, underscored the need to substitute diesel-generated electricity in Northern Brazil for biodiesel, which is cheaper, locally produced and creates job opportunities for local communities.

Mandy Rambharos, ESKOM, said that CDM projects should focus on adaptation, vulnerability and capacity building.

Gao Feng, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of China, highlighted the increased demand for electricity in China and said the Government is revising its Energy Plan to increase generation capacity.

Jim Burpee, Ontario Power Generation, said his company is the highest emitter of carbon dioxide in its sector in Canada and drew attention to its voluntary commitment to reduce net emissions.

Beat Nobs, Agency for the Environment, Forests and Landscape of Switzerland, highlighted the role of the private sector in mitigating climate change.

Shigetaka Seki, Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry of Japan, said the CDM should focus on renewable energy and social development.

Business roundtable: Industry initiatives

Presented by the Business Rountable

Dale Heydlauff, American Electric Power, presented Climate Resolve, a voluntary initiative to reduce greenhouse gas emissions that is based on the belief that climate change is a global issue.

Thomas Marx, General Motors Corporation, noted that businesses' voluntary and technology initiatives responding to climate change include: scientific, economic, and policy research; voluntary greenhouse gas reporting; and voluntary programmes to reduce and sequester greenhouse gas emissions.

Mitchell Jackson, FedEx, highlighted that his organization is committed using innovations and technologies to minimize atmospheric emissions from its operations and products.

Thomas Catania, Whirlpool Corporation, said that his company will decrease total absolute emissions by 3% by 2008, resulting in annual savings of four million tonnes of carbon.

Thomas Jacob, DuPont, explained that his company's goals include reducing its global emissions by 65%, and obtaining 10% of its energy from renewable sources by 2010.

Dave Garman, US Department of Energy, described US climate change initiatives including: Climate VISION, a public-private partnership; the US EPA's Climate Leaders; and the government-backed Energy Star.

Discussion: Participants asked about DuPont's specific emission reduction measures and noted that companies participating in Climate Resolve often commit themselves to greenhouse gas reductions but do not follow through.

Recent scientific results from the Hadley Centre

Presented by the Hadley Centre for Climate Protection and Research

Elliot Morley, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) of the UK, stated that much of the observed global warming over past 50 years has been caused by human activity. He emphasized the UK's commitment to addressing climate change and noted that actions, adaptation programmes and further research are required.

Geoff Jenkins, Hadley Centre for Climate Protection and Research, presented recent research findings, including that: 2002 was the second warmest year globally; there has been a 1°C increase in land temperature rise since the end of the 19th century; storms in the UK have increased over the last 50 years; and warming over continents can be attributed to human activities.

Nigel Arnell, Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research / University of Southampton, discussed a study on the impacts of climate change on carbon storage and ecosystems, water resources, food security, coastal flood risk and malaria risk. He noted that the study's results are merely indicative, and that only one impacts model was used.

Discussion: During the ensuing discussion, the panel was joined by Peter Stott, Hadley Centre for Climate Protection and Research, and David Warrilow, DEFRA. Participants noted the dangers of using just one model for a study. In response to a question on Arnell's statement that some regions will have lower malaria risk due to climate change, Arnell responded that some regions become dryer and others wetter as a result of climate change.

Policies to advance climate mitigation technologies

Presented by Resources for the Future (RFF)

Richard Newell, RFF, identified the need for: a climate change policy portfolio to promote fundamental changes in the energy system; increased funding for research and development of mitigation technologies; and economic incentives to promote renewable energy.

Cedric Philibert, IEA, indicated that both technological and behavioral changes are required to achieve significant emissions cuts. He stressed the need for international technology cooperation to promote spillovers that would increase the effectiveness of the Kyoto Protocol, and noted the significance of technological lock-in.

Daniel Lashof, Natural Resources Defense Council, noted that current use of high carbon coal plants operating on conventional coal technologies are inconsistent with achieving emissions reductions, and stressed the need for a portfolio of energy options including increased energy efficiency, renewable energy, gas and coal gasification combined cycle technologies. He outlined potential oil savings in the private transport sector, and concluded by emphasizing the need to deploy existing technologies and develop new technologies.

Tashi Sugiyama, Japan's Central Research Institute of the Electric Power Industry, considered the potential for future international cooperation, including: internationally coordinated demonstration programmes; funding for further research and development; and the development of a global biomass energy chain.

Thomas Marx, General Motors Corporation, discussed various technologies that are under development to reduce the fuel consumption of vehicles and considered various government support programmes. He stressed the need for common international standards for vehicle manufacture that avoid technological lock-in.

Discussion: Participants highlighted the need to consider the costs of technologies and emphasized the need to remodel Kyoto towards driving technological change.

| Back to Linkages home | Visit IISDnet | Send e-mail to ENB |
© 2003,  IISD. All  rights reserved.