Le climat et les ressources naturelles.Quels enjeux pour 2010 ?

Des émissions de gaz à effet de serre à réduire

Brigitte Gloire - Oxfam – Bxl - 15 juin 2010

Table of content

Climate injustice Domestic cuts as part of the Oxfam « climate Change”

campaign Flexible mecanisms in the KP Problems in the supplementarity Problems in the additionality Problems in fulfilling the goal in sustainable

development The winners Excluding criteria for CDMs Act now

D’où proviennent les principales émissions de GES ?

1: Sealing the deal 2: de-carbonising and making the model of growth / dvpt more sustainable

3: Holding on to humanity

A FAIR, SAFE AND BINDING DEAL ASAP

La campagne d’oxfam se décline en 3 objectifs

Massive international resource transfers for developing countries additional to ODA + sustainable /accountable adaptation practices and policies, civil society participation, etc…

Rich countries lead on equitable mitigation action - domestic action and financing for mitigation

Global public mobilization to ensure political will through public pressure and expose special interest

Campaign objectives

• Un modèle de dvpt (dans le Nord et le Sud) plus durable garantissant une diminution d’au moins 40 % (2020) et 80 à 95 % (2050) de gaz à effet de serre (GES) dans les pays de l’annexe 1 par rapport à 1990. Ces réductions doivent être majoritairement opérées chez nous (au moins pour 75 %) et pour le solde éventuel, basées sur des mécanismes flexibles (offsets) qui répondent au double objectif de DD dans les PVDs et d’efficacité ( additionalité des

réductions).

The Kyoto Protocol establishes three market-based "flexible mechanisms" to help Northern countries avoid or delay reducing their greenhouse gas emissions.

• Emissions Trading. Northern countries failing to meet their emission targets can buy reductions from other Northern countries who lower emissions beyond their targets.

• The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). Northern countries can finance projects in the South aiming to mitigate climate change in return for credits which are banked and ultimately used to license continued pollution at home.

• Joint Implementation. Northern countries can finance projects aiming to mitigate climate change in other Northern (often Eastern European) countries, receiving credits accordingly.

• Corporations can use the carbon credits from these mechanisms to increase their emissions (those that restructure or go out of business will leave governments responsible for the associated carbon debt)

CAP & TRADE

Carbon offsets

rationale

• Carbon trade has been prefered to other regulatory instruments to counter CC because of ideological stance against regulation / interdiction and because of the assumption that it’s the most cost-effective way of achieving emissions reductions.

Problems at different level

• Ethical / Coherence / exemplarity• Lack of developed countries credibility• Rebund effect (in the tourism industry for example..)• Displacement / delocalization of responsabilities • Distraction / divertion from politicians to really support

domestic GHG reductions• Privatisation of the common (atmosphere)• People displacement / landgrabbing• Fraud (on VAT – resell – corruption) • Effectiveness in GHG (additionality) and sustainable

development in the south

Problems in the supplementarity

Despite clear references in COP & KP decision :

• “….That the use of the mechanisms shall be supplemental to domestic action and domestic action shall thus constitute a significant element of the effort made by each Party included in Annex I to meet its quantified emission limitation and reduction commitments under Article 3, paragraph 1…”.decison 5 – COP 6 july 2001

• “…Decides that, for the second commitment period, additions to and subtractions from the assigned amount of a Party resulting from emissions trading and the project-based mechanisms shall not exceed 30 per cent of the quantified emission limitation and reduction commitment of that Party.” FCCC/KP/AWG/2010/6/Add.3 29 April 2010

Problems with additionality

• Additionality : It refers to the issue of whether GHG reduction or sequestration in a JI or CDM project occurs over and above the baseline and constitutes a new reduction that would not have otherwise occurred in absence of the project. But from “a small fraction” (Haya B. berkeley) to only 60 % (öko-Institut Berlin) of CDM are additional.

Problems in fulfilling the goal in sustainable development

• From a large literature review, the conclusion is that the CDM has little or no effect on achieving sustainable developement in developing countries

• Too few projects are being implemented in LDCs

• Too few small scale projects in rural area or at the household level

• Many projects / CERs represent marginal improvements (coal fired power plants with co-generation) or very cheap mitigation equipment (HFC / NxO….)

But windfalls profits for fossil fuel-intensive corporations

• The ETS has turned the ‘polluter pays’ principle into a ‘polluter earns’ principle: The very industry sectors chiefly responsible for the climate crisis are being handed property rights to the atmosphere in the form of emissions permits that are worth billions of euros.

Sandbag report ETS 2008 carbon fat cats

Excluding criteria for CDMs

• Nuclear• Large hydropower• Waste incineration• Carbon Capture and Storage• Coal• Unsustainable or chemical-treated biofuels• Unsustainable or chemical-treated biomass/biochar• Ocean fertilization and other forms of geoengineering• HFC production• Any project requiring resettlement or which deprives

indigenous people of their customary use of land

And above all

• No inclusion of LULUCF project types beyond the existing afforestation / reforestation category and non inclusion of REDD in the CDM

• No double accounting : No offsets budgets in climate financing

No double-counting offsets as climate finance

40% below 1990 by 2020

$100bn / year by 2020 for

mitigation

Domestic reductions

Off-sets

Limit growth in emissions (equal to A1 reductions)

Plus off-sets

A1 fair share ofglobal mitigation effort

NA1 actions contingent on support

Reductions take place

<2ºC pathway requires: BOTH 40% below 1990 by 2020 in Annex I countries; AND a limit to the growth in emissions equal to Annex I reductions in Non-Annex I countries. Any offsetting must be in addition to the these reductions in Non-Annex I countries.

Domestic positive action • Change in our model of growth - Support for ambitious domestic emissions reductions in

industrialized countries + sustainable production & consumption patterns • Subsidy shifting away from fossil fuels• Tax shift where appropriate on carbon intensive activities – carbon tax• Prohibition of highly GHG emitting activities / products / technology (HFC – big cars - coal

plant…)• Tax according the polluter payer principle • Cap in the aviation / maritim sector• Auctionning of AAUs• Support for existing positive initiatives and legislation such as feed-in-tariff schemes and

shift in electricity metering so tariffs increase rather than decrease with increasing usage• Public investment in structural change and sustainable renewable • Creative ways of engaging citizens in a debate on how to embark on a just transition away

from fossil fuel addicted economies and towards zero-carbon economies: how to ensure just transition for all those whose jobs are tied to sunset fossil fuel industries

• Promotion of public discussion in plain language and go by ideological stance - a priori – around carbon trading

• Discussion of innovation rather than marginal numerical emission cuts• Recognition that there are no popular politics and facing the fact that fossil fuel industries

have to be sunset industries if we are to avoid climate chaos

Act now

• Priority to domestic cuts + regulatory mechanism + interdiction of unstainable / high carbon practices / products

• Higher level of golden standarts and review of CDMs / ETS mechanism

• No mix with climate finance for developing countries

Main sources of informations

• www.unfccc.org

• www.oxfam.org

• www.climnet.org

• www.fern.org

• www.sinkswatch.org

• www.sandbag.org.uk