"When I Was Ten"

Obviously, the Co-Chair of the contact group for Loss and Damage, Robert Van Lierop (representing St. Kitts and Nevis) was a bit older than ten when, in 1991, he recommended tabling the issue of Loss and Damage.  This astonishing admission came about when the G-77/China group mentioned that this topic wasn’t new to Doha last year, but had actually been in the works for three years.  The representative of Nauru has a longer memory, and she mentioned that the topic was first mentioned at Bali in 1991, and that the co-chair of this current meeting was responsible for tabling it.  In the interest of full disclosure, Van Lierop acknowledged the misstep, and, in a humbling moment, said he tabled the motion “when I was ten.” 

To be fair, in 1991, the severe impacts of climate change were being considered more as a theoretical possibility, and not as something absolutely certain. The first IPCC report had just been published in 1990, which served as the basis for the UNFCCC meetings. But for the past few COP meetings, climate change impacts are clearly a reality, and Loss and Damage is an important topic.

The first meeting of the contact group was open to observers, but will quickly change to closed meetings for the duration of COP 19.  Bolivia, speaking on behalf of China and the G77 has urged the group to quickly start working on the text itself, rather than spending time on speeches and rhetoric. In good faith, they submitted a text hours earlier and sent it ahead to the other parties.  The Co-Chair acknowledged the submitted text, along with two others: those submitted by the EU and Switzerland/Norway.  However, no texts were available at the time of the meeting for discussion, and opening statements were made as usual.

All of the representatives who spoke conveyed their thoughts and prayers to the people of the Philippines. The United States representative spoke of the $20 million of humanitarian assistance already committed to the Philippines, along with the pre-positioned team coordinating help efforts. She also recognized the existential threat to low-lying islands for a variety of reasons.  There is a broad range of issues that are part of Loss and Damage, including mitigation, assistance, and migration. A comprehensive report about the various aspects of this important issue can be found here.

At this point, only the text by China and the G77 is posted online at the UNFCCC site.  This is an issue that will be carefully watched by the developing countries and the NGOs.  The developing countries strongly believe that they need to have a system in place to address loss and damage, and they are looking beyond ad hoc humanitarian responses which are are “appreciated but not adequate.”

Workshops and Workstreams

Even after five years, there is much to be confused about at the COP meetings between all the acronyms, jargon, and complicated governance frameworks. There are contact groups, informal consultations, open-ended consultations, meetings, workstreams, work programmes (yes, the British spelling is correct), workshops, daily programmes (that change several times a day), briefings, official documents, informal papers, and even non-papers. (I am not kidding about that one!) Plus, some of these sessions are open to observers (civil society) one day, but not the next. Week one is an intense work week as different groups collect data and ideas to draft language and plans for moving forward. When the high-level segment commences on Tuesday of week #2, high ranking ministers and heads of states use these materials, but have also been known to scrap all the work and start from scratch at the negotiating table. Science seems so much easier (and more logical) than this multilateral policy stuff!

This year, there seems to be an unusual number of workshops. I have been to three already, and it is only day #3. I went to one last year, which was the first I ever recall seeing on the agenda, err, I mean daily programme. In subsequent posts, I will elaborate on the content of the three workshops I attended on

• “Issues related to agriculture” (as mandated in paragraph 83 of FCCC/SBSTA/2013/3);
• "Gender and climate change”; and
• “Lessons learned from relevant experience of other multilateral environmental agreements.”

When I was a graduate student in the 1980s, our lab worked on the impact of increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide on photosynthesis in algae and plants. This information had implications for crop yields (agricultural productivity), and we knew that different types of plants (C3 vs C4; I won’t bother you with the biochemical details) respond differently to increasing carbon dioxide availability. During those graduate school years (1981 – 1986), carbon dioxide levels went from 338 to 346 ppm. This year the levels hover around 400 ppm. As the implications of rising greenhouse gases became more apparent, scientists realized that there would be many impacts on agriculture.

Yet despite the wealth of scientific publications around this issue, it wasn’t until COP17 in Durban, South Africa (2011) that text was adopted that enabled (mandated) a dialogue about agricultural impacts and adaptation. This was assigned to a working group within the SBSTA framework, and plans were made to hold this workshop – now two years later.

What is SBSTA (besides one of the many IPCCC acronyms)? Following the adoption of the Kyoto Protocol, two bodies were set up to deal with the technical discussions. The Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (or SBSTA) is one of these. And alas, agriculture is one of the issues that now falls under this group’s auspices.

At COP18 in Doha, issues of women and gender were front and center (oddly enough in a country where women’s rights are a bit different than what we are accustomed to in the United States). Concerns centered on the fact that, globally, women are disproportionately impacted by climate change for many reasons, yet the policy work related to the environmental problem is negotiated mainly by men. Two important decisions were adopted which “promote gender balance and improving the participation of women in Convention negotiations and in the representation of the Parties in bodies established under the Convention or the Kyoto Protocol.” The work to implement these decisions fell to the SBI, the Subsidiary Body for Implementation – the group that advises the COP (Conference of the Parties) on “improving the effective application of the Convention and the Kyoto Protocol”.

The third workshop was organized by yet another group – the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action or ADP. This new working group was established in 2011 in Durban (sometimes things make sense) and is charged with adopting an agreement by 2015 to be implemented in 2020, effectively replacing the Kyoto Protocol. Given the difficulties in achieving consensus on pretty much anything – details of mitigation (reducing the causes of climate change), adaptation (learning to live under a new climate regime and increasing resiliency), and financing things like technology transfer, a Green Climate Fund, or loss and damage resulting from historic, current, and future emissions – this new group is looking elsewhere for ideas. In this workshop, representatives from other successful multilateral agreements related to the environment shared their models of decision making and implementation. These included CITES (an agreement related to endangered species and international trade), an agreement under the Stockholm Convention related to Persistent Organic Pollutants (the “dirty dozen” and other toxic compounds), and the Montreal Protocol that addresses the phase out of ozone-depleting chemicals that degrade the stratospheric ozone layer.

If you are still following along, you should know that these items represent only a small percentage of the work that goes on at a COP meeting!

A panel discussion during the "Gender and Climate Change" workshop

Note:  I am grateful to the Organization Internationale de la Francophonie for their extremely value resources including the "Guide to the Negotiations for COP 19 and CMP 9 (#13), and "Background Analysis".  These resources are handy references and contain detailed analysis on the history and status of negotiations.



High tech ocean study

The US Center at COP 19 was the venue for a presentation by researchers at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, leaning on a lot of work carried out through NOAA and NASA.  The oceans are under severe stress, not only by overfishing and being used as a dumping ground for all of the worlds trash, but also by acidification.  Our atmosphere, stressed as it is, would have even more carbon dioxide were it not for the fact that this gas dissolves readily into water. Unfortunately, carbon dioxide is at least as harmful to the oceans as it is to the air.

Amazingly sophisticated scientific work is being done.  The two presentations, “Climate Change and the World’s Oceans” and “Ocean Deoxygenation in a Warming World,” were extraordinarily instructive.  It turns out that our country has a veritable army of satellites and measuring devices tracking such things as ocean currents, wind, surface temperature, water height, salinity and gravity.  These measurements can be coordinated to answer seemingly esoteric questions on the workings of the ocean.  

For a taste of what was discussed, explore the website oceanscientists.org.

Generation C (Climate)

#WeStandWithYou action of solidarity with Yeb Sano on Tuesday at COP19. Source: Adopt a Negotiator, 2013

-->

Christiana Figueres, the UNFCCC Executive Secretary, has nicknamed the youth activists “Generation C,” and in the past has been very supportive of their efforts. At the Global PowerShift meeting in June, she encouraged them to work towards a draft agreement in 2014.  In addition to urging them to really understand policy, technology, and finance, she also told them to make consumer choices taking into account carbon footprints and to raise their voices to build movement. She commented, “I still do not understand why we don’t have people on the streets every single day raising their voices for climate.”

While it may work for the youth to raise their voices on the streets, it doesn’t work in the conference halls.  After the speech by Yeb Sano, three youth were escorted out and lost their credentials for “causing trouble.”  After initiating the “We Stand With You” chanting, they unfurled a banner with the number of casualties from last year’s typhoon (1,200) and this year’s supertyphoon Haiyan (10,000+?) and asked “How Many More?”  Accounts and photos can be found at the blog and the press release.  It is hardly surprising that at the plenary session of the the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action, Emilia Merlini, a representative of the YOUNGOs (Youth NGOs) called for urgent action before noting that “our generation is voiceless in these corridors” and then taping her mouth shut to drive home the point.

The YOUNGOs are also frustrated that Christiana Figueres has agreed to be a keynote speaker at the upcoming coal conference.  They challenged her to withdraw from the commitment in an open letter.  So far, Figueres has chosen to stick to her plans to be at the coal conference.

Fossil of the Day goes to ...

(If the video link doesn't work, you can find it here: You Tube Video: Fossil of the Day)

Check out this video of the "Fossil of the Day" award ceremony. The Fossil of the Day awards were first presented at the climate talks in 1999, when the members of the Climate Action Network (CAN) voted for countries judged to have "done their 'best' to block progress in the negotiations in the last days of the talks."

Yesterday, the Fossil of the Day went to Australia, who, despite the "crushing losses suffered by the Philippines" revealed that they would not put forward "any new finance commitments."

Today, the award went to Poland for a long list of reasons, according to the CAN media release: 

1. Continuously opposing the European Union from taking more ambitious climate action
2. Co-hosting a Coal Summit coinciding with the COP but not organizing any debate on renewable energy opportunities
3. Inviting polluting companies that openly oppose an ambitious climate action to sponsor the COP
4. Allowing the dirty side of European industry, Business Europe, to represent the business voice at the pre-COP
5. Writing mad postings on theofficial COP 19 website about the economic opportunities the melting Arctic will bring as well as chasing the "pirates, ecologists and terrorists" on the sea
6. Presenting delegates with standard climate denialist rhetoric through their mobile device app, repeating the old chestnut that "climate changes are natural phenomena, which occured (sic) many times on Earth"

“What happens in this stadium is not a game”

"What happens in this stadium is not a game”

Those were the words of UNFCCC Executive Secretariat in her opening comments for COP19.  “There are not two sides.  All of humanity will either win or lose.”  Sobering words to start the day.

Despite the general sense that UNFCCC climate negotiations have more or less stalled over the past several years, COP meetings tend to open the two-week session with a sense of optimism, a renewed hope that maybe this time significant progress will be made.  In contrast, this year’s opening ceremony, my fifth, was the grimmest start that I have witnessed.  Perhaps it was the horrific news coming in the aftermath of Typhoon Haiyan and the emotional comments from the negotiator from the Philippines (see earlier post).  Maybe it is because Poland, the host country for the climate talks, is also hosting a coal-summit that coincides with the COP meeting.  UNFCCC Executive Secretary Christiana Figueres is speaking at that summit, and NGOs are questioning why.  The youth went so far as to un-invite her from speaking to their constituency.

Maybe it was the take-home messages from the latest report of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) – reiterated by Chairperson Rajendra Pachauri this morning:  the newest trends in rising global sea and land surface temperatures, the stats on the decrease in snow and ice cover, sea level rise occurring at rates greater than in the last two millennia, and the 40% increases in dissolved carbon dioxide in the ocean, which, in turn, lowers the pH of the water even further.  Such sobering scientific details are not typically mentioned in this ceremony, despite calls by many in other sessions to remind negotiators to use science as they develop policy.  Christiana had us all take a deep breath of the air, reminding us as we did that, for the first time in human history, the air we inhale contains 400 ppm carbon dioxide.

In an afternoon session sponsored by the Third World Network (TWN) entitled What to expect from Warsaw anger and frustration with the lack of progress was clearly evident.  These countries are already suffering from the impact of climate change – caused by greenhouse gases emitted into the atmospheric commons largely from other (developed) countries.  The anger is fueled by concerns that developed countries are trying to profit off of their pollution (carbon markets and “clean development mechanisms”) and reneging on promises to fund technology transfer programs and pay for loss and damages – all while they continue to provide subsidies for fossil fuel companies.  The comment was made that reimbursements for climate-caused destruction is not simply “planes dropping blankets and medicine” when disasters strike.  Panelists questioned why wealthy nations find money "to bail out banks and to buy drones", but cry “economic recession when it comes to rescuing the planet.”  And I should note that the panelists included both civil society representatives and negotiators (official delegates from countries who are parties to the U.N. convention).

Outside of the COP19 venue, a crowd of violent Polish nationalist demonstrators disrupted the Independence Day march.  Inside, delegates were pondering the words spoken by the Polish COP19 president during the opening ceremony:

If it weren’t complex enough, we are all experiencing threatening climate change. Changing landscapes, forcing us from our normal ways. Killing.

Only two days ago, a powerful typhoon swept through the Philippines, claiming thousands of lives, leaving hundreds of thousands of people displaced from their homes. A great human tragedy. Unforgettable, painful, awakening.

I say awakening because it is yet another proof that we are losing this unequal struggle between man and nature. It got the better of us yet again, and will continue to do so in the future if we do not close ranks and act together to strike back.

Climate is a global issue, global problem and global opportunity at the same time.

An opportunity? For whom?

Maybe these words might not seem so peculiar if the host country website for COP19 didn’t include an introductory piece pondering whether humans are in fact are contributing to climate change.  Perhaps that is why Dr. Pachauri reminded those in attendance at the opening ceremony that in the IPCC’s latest Assessment Report (published at the end of September) that panel concluded there is greater than 95% certainty that humans cause the climate change that we are now experiencing.

"We Stand With You"

Recent COPs have been partially remembered by the extreme weather events occurring just prior or during the conference.  But who could imagine that the Philippines would be struck twice within the year?  Last year, after Typhoon Bopha killed more than 1000 people,  their lead negotiator Naderev Saño was remembered for asking “If not us, then who?  If not now, then when? If not here, then where?”  This week, Typhoon Haiyan has likely killed over 10,000 people, measuring  8.1 on the 8.0 Dvorak scale, and the questions persist.  

Granted the privilege of being the first country to be recognized for opening statements, Naderev Saño, of the Philippines, once again captured the hearts of the delegates in the first session.  In a 15 minute statement, he thanked Poland for their hospitality and the white flowers they were bestowed to honor their loss. He was the first to thank the young people for their activism. He recognized the resiliency of the people of the Philippines. But he also acknowledged that Typhoon Haiyan must be a “painful awakening” to the reality of climate change.  He challenged climate change deniers to “leave their ivory towers and armchairs” and to visit “the islands of the Caribbean and Indian Ocean … the Arctic … the Amazon and the hills of Central America. … And if that is not enough, then go to the Philippines now.” 

Naderev Saño once again called for action: “We have entered a new era.  We need emergency climate action now. I speak on behalf of those who have perished and those who are orphaned … we cannot allow super-typhoons to become a way of life. … It is now the 19^th COP; we need to stop this madness.” He also said the time has arrived to consider loss and damage. The most powerful moment was, however, when he related his personal story.  His family is from one of the hardest hit areas. He still doesn’t know the fate of his relatives. His brother is alive, and for the past three days has had no food, as he collects with his own hands the bodies of his neighbors.  Naderev Saño ended by pledging to fast throughout COP 19 until he sees substantial progress made towards reaching a climate agreement.  The immediate response from youth was the chanting of “We Stand With You … We Stand With You.”

China had the only possible response – a point of order asking for 3 minutes of silence.  Agreed.

Video link

Full text
 

Welcome to COP19

The banner welcoming us to the COP19 venue.

Oil and Gas-loving Qatar and now Coal-Dependent Poland Hosts of COP

-->

Last year, Qatar was proud to host the COP, even as oil and gas exports account for 85% of its export earnings.

This year, COP is hosted by Poland, and once again we are in a country heavily dependent on fossil fuels.   The Polish prime minister commented that “hard coal and lignite -- and soon shale gas -- will remain our principal energy sources. That's where the future of the energy sector lies.”  Flying in to Warsaw, I saw one single isolated wind turbine – quite different from the landscape of neighboring Germany, where there are over 21,000 wind turbines scattered across the country providing 10% of the energy with an installed capacity of 29,000 megawatts.  Poland does have some wind farms, but they account for only 2% of the country’s energy needs, with an installed capacity of 1616 megawatts as of 2011.  (http://www.ewea.org/fileadmin/ewea_documents/documents/publications/statistics/Stats_2011.pdf)

It will be hard to miss the importance of coal to Poland. The government will also be hosting the World Coal Association’s International Coal and Climate Summit November 18-19, coinciding with the last week of the UNFCCC meeting.   The AP reports that over 600,000 jobs in Poland are provided by the coal industry and affiliated sectors, and that Polish labor union leaders and nationalists are hosting a panel discussion on the financial impacts of climate action. Tomorrow, opening day of the COP, the Nationalists will be marching in one of the demonstrations celebrating Polish Independence Day … it promises to be an interesting day.  http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/polish-government-criticized-for-hosting-coal-event-at-same-time-as-un-climate-conference/2013/11/08/0d8a3a3c-4847-11e3-95a9-3f15b5618ba8_story.html

Most interesting to me, however, is that Poland and neighboring Czech Republic have also “banned” Germany’s green energy.  When Germany’s systems are maxed out because of heavy winds, they have been exporting the energy to Poland and the Czech Republic, who in turn have had to shut down coal plants!  Poland and the Czech Republic have been installing switches to block the unwanted energy to prevent destabilization of their own energy systems.

http://www.thegwpf.org/poland-czech-republic-ban-germanys-green-energy/

On the bright side, there are voices for change in Poland.  Check out the Polish Climate Coalition, an association of 23 NGOs committed to climate protection activities.  Just last month, they published a report outlining how Poland can cut its coal demand by 50% by 2030.  http://www.koalicjaklimatyczna.org/lang/ang/page/about_us/id/44/

en Route to Warsaw and COP 19

While killing time during a long layover in Zurich, I was catching up on some news columns and opinion pieces related to climate change. 

My options (the reasonably priced ones) from Newark to Warsaw included either this extended stop in Switzerland or flights with a one-hour layover in Frankfort.  Having gone through that large and busy airport last year on the way to COP18, I didn't think a mere hour would be sufficient to go through passport control, customs, and security.  Our student Marla was pulled aside on our return to have her backpack and stuffed animal checked for something.  Drugs? Trace explosives?  We were, after all coming from the desert-state Qatar, after doing work relating to climate change, so I guess traces of sand must have seemed suspicious.   Given the clockwork precision in Switzerland and only passport control to go through, an hour would have been sufficient for an international connection, but nonetheless, here I sit.

Back to that backlog of reading...As I skimmed through the articles, I was reminded a) how few voices actually get published in the mainstream media and b) that the views published on this complex global topic of climate change are annoyingly polarized.  Either the apocalypse is fast approaching or the writers express complete denial and scoff at climate scientists and activists.  This is sufficient to cast doubt into the mix, creating confusion and a lot of shoulder-shrugging apathy.  People tune out the messages and important dialog is shut down.  End result:  little action on U.S. policy on climate change and a poorly informed public.

The truth, of course, is somewhere in between to two polarized views.  Climate change coverage in the media, like with any controversial topic, is filled with propaganda and emotionally-charged images and metaphors -- think polar bears, images of starving children in drought-stricken Africa, and pictures of Al Gore with flames coming out of his mouth scorching the planet. (Yes, these do exist.) What we try to do in this blog, is to present the issues being discussed at the international level, mainly from our attendance at the United Nations climate conference.  This includes progress on negotiations, information we learn from side events, and conversations with people representing the 195 countries in attendance. Much of this is never covered by the mainstream media that we listen to or read.

Moravian College is a member of the Research and Independent NGOs (RINGO) - one of the officially recognized constituency groups or focal points of U.N. accredited organizations within civil society (1).  We advocate for nothing more than having the most up-to-date research data be used for developing climate policy on the international stage -- be it for mitigation, building resilience, adapting to change, or minimizing risk.  We also work to get this technical information -- translated into a form that is accessible and relevant -- into the hands of stakeholders ranging from individuals to communities, to educators and students and politicians who should be developing climate policy at the local, state, and national levels.

It is important to recognize the bias in what we read and hear.  Even in our attempting to translate information into a comprehensible form, our passion for this issue, and our concern for the future of the planet and humanity, is likely to creep in.  But we hope our stories convey truth about what people are discussing and experiencing globally.

Speaking of propaganda...The idyllic images of red-roofed villages and Sound-of-Music like scenery of Switzerland seen in travel magazines and brochures, and on postcards need to be supplemented with the views you get while flying over the country:  nuclear power plants, large industrial complexes with retention ponds filled with strange colored sludge, and strip mines in the foothills of the Alps.  Yes, the truth can be a bit shocking.

The only Fräulein I saw with long braids surrounded by cows in green fields were images on the tunnel walls where the tram from one terminal to another goes by at just the right speed to make it appear as if the young girl is smiling, waving, and winking at you.  (Like the cards or book pages you flip through to see images "move" -- a concept most recently incorporated into a commercial "a body at rest tends to stay at rest; a body in motion... for some arthritis prescription.)  And just for added effect, sounds of birds chirping and cows mooing were piped in to the tram cars!

The truth of the week is that one of the largest, strongest typhoons to ever hit land has wreaked havoc on the Philippine Islands.  The extent of the damage and death toll as I write are not yet known.  Today (Sunday), CNN reports that the casualties could reach 10,000.  Yesterday, it reported to be 1200 based on preliminary reports from Red Cross International.  Headlines read "Like a disaster movie" and "Apocalyptic aftermath."  We don't know if this was a freak storm or one of the extreme weather events that may become the new norm of climate change.  No doubt, those organizations lobbying for more rapid and sweeping action on climate change will try to convince us of the latter.   I can't help be reminded, however, of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report entitled Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation (2) that was published last year and was a major topic of discussion at COP18 in Qatar.

Stay tuned for more reports when we arrive in Poland.


1.  For more about civil society's role in the COP meeting process, see our post from last year:  http://www.moraviancollegeatunfccc.blogspot.com/2012/12/on-role-of-civil-society-in-un-process.html.
2.  See http://www.ipcc-wg2.gov/SREX/ and the blog post from 2012 referenced above.