Eamon Ryan’s Blog

The slow pace of progress is in direct contrast to the urgency with which this issue needs to be addressed.   Today was my forth session in the Ad Hoc working group on the  Kyoto protocol post 2012 and we are no closer to agreeing a work programme for the next year, which was the only item for decision on the agenda. 

Increasingly the argument is between the EU and Japan and the rest of the world.   The battleground is whether we should be even talking about aspirational targets for global reductions or whether the only game in town is getting the current signatories to the Kyoto Protocol to agree to further cuts.   

It seems to me the EU and Japan are now playing a ’Good Cop - Bad cop’ routine.   Japan was awarded the Fossil fuel dinosaur of the day yesterday as a result of the bad cop routine, but Ambassador Nishimura said he didn’t care and went for the jugular:

   “Our job starts by looking at a global long term vision whether it is aspirational or otherwise.    To start discussing this would send a first message to billions of sufferers in this continent and the island peoples whose homes are already drenched. This must be the message to the women who are weeping.  A message that finally the UN has decided to move globally ahead.   Other than this what message should we send.  A cost accounting message to financial operators, is that the work we are supposed to do?   Some friends say African people are not interested in hearing my message.  If so, I say thank you very much.  I will go home unless we are willing to send a global message to the World. That the UN is moving to achieve stabilisation of the climate.“

There was a sharp intake of diplomatic breath when the Chinese representative who rarely if ever speaks , rose to respond:

  ”In response to Japan.  I would like to join him by going back home,  if we are discussing issues not in our mandate.   The global message can be contained in the Ministerial responses from the Convention.   Our mandate is clear; to focus on establishing further commitments from Annex 1 countries (Signatories to the protocol).   We need to send a clear signal to the carbon markets about these reductions.”   

It is a strange time when a communist country is more concerned about the financial market and the capitalist country is talking is on the side of the poor and the weeping women.  The excellent Maltese chair has asked to meet the key parties in private over the weekend and the ad hoc working group will meet again on Monday afternoon.   It will be a miracle if he can get a good result.  If I was the EU representative I would start to play hardball and remind the Chinese delegation that those carbon markets are for the most part dependent on European Finance.

 All this talk of walking home also applies to myself, as this is my last day at the convention.  I am tired of all the talk and don’t think I could do another day anyway.   I am however very glad I came. To learn as much about the issue as possible and  to get a first hand of the negotiations.  As I have said already, I think they will be viewed by history as the most important international negotiations ever undertaken by mankind.     My prognosis for the future is slightly more pessimistic having seen how UN negotiations can be stymied by the need to pull every country along.  However, we at least have the framework convention and the Kyoto protocol as a means of trying to reach international agreement.   We need to press our government to make sure they support and lead the process. 

Our own government has joined the Eu in setting a 15-30 reduction target in our 1990 emmissions by 2020.  Given that we are expected to be 30% above that 1990 level in 2010 we are in effect committing to cut our emmissions in half over a decade.   I go home to help take on that unprecedented task.          

Mattatu is the local name for the battered hiace minibus vans which serve as one of the main forms of public transport for this city of five million people. In the closing session today the chief EU negotiator Artur Range-Metzger used them to good effect. “We now need the means to take a long journey. We have Kyoto but expecting it to deliver as it currently is would be like trying to take a Mattatu to the moon.”

The debate had earlier centred on whether we should set a long term target for global emissions and the timing in the work programme in the next year between qualitative analysis of what might be technologically feasible and quantitative work trying to set real reduction targets. Unfortunately most countries seemed to be pushing for a bottom up approach whereby targets would be based on national circumstances rather than a top down approach where we allocate on a fair basis the global reductions the scientists say we have to make.

Ambassador Nishimura argued that as Japan had already make serious efforts in energy efficiency, their marginal cost in further reducing emissions would be higher. “Why do you encircle me? Why do you corner me so that we have to say something prematurely when we don’t know all the factors. It is not a good exercise which would not allow us set a high aspirational target. We are the workers - you are the onlookers!”

Earlier in the day I met the UK Labour MP Colin Channel who is trying to get the African Governments to propose that the system of “Contraction and Convergence” be included for consideration in this whole process. You can check out details of the proposal at http://www.gci.org.uk/ The idea is that we ‘contract’ the global emissions in a set timetable using a global carbon rationing scheme and that over the same time we ‘converge’ the initial carbon allocation that individuals receive towards a equal per capita level. Doing that would bring the principle of equity as well as scientific and economic considerations into the orderly system we will need to stabilise our climate emissions.

The other highlight of the day was a presentation by the German Advisory Council on climate change on how climate change is effecting our oceans. For everything there is to know about sea level rises, the shutting down of the gulf stream, the effects on marine life, hurricanes, typhoons and the possibility of carbon storage under our seas you can check out their latest report on http://www.wbgu.de/wbgu_sn2006_en.html

I am staying with Paul and Kath who are good friends for years and who live within ten minutes of the UN compound.  Kath runs a “Save the Children”programme in Southern Sudan and Paul has been an advisor to the Minister of Finance in Kabul for the last four years.   Last night they had myself and their neighbours who work in the UN for dinner.

Given events here, the conversation natually turned to climate change.  What surprised me afterwards was that even though these people were working at a very senior level in development agencies and were clearly interested in the subject,  they did not have a sense of the knife edge that we are on.    People still seem to have a blind faith that some technological solution will arrive in the next few years to sort it all out.    The problem is that the tecnological developments are decades rather than years away.

 Carbon Storage is one of the main technological white hopes but in a presentation yesterday an industry spokesperson admitted that the costs involved in seperating out and burying the carbon created in a power station are currently estimated at some $60 to $80 per tonne.  This would almost double the cost of the electricity.   The European Union is now talking about building some 15 pilot projects to try and advance the technology.  However, it will still take ten to fifteen years before we could set such solutions as a mandatory requirement and in the meantime China is estimated to be building one new coal fired power plant a year.

The European Union has committed itself to a 15% - 30% cut in emmissions by 2020.   At the same time an EU representative said the inclusion of Aviation in the Emmissions trading system would take several years to set up and that there is no plans to include road transport in the scheme.    

Given that by 2010 Ireland will probably be 30% above 1990 levels and given we set the least ambitious possible target of a 15% reduction by 2020, we will still have to cut our emmissions almost in half in a decade.    That will be the most demanding national challenge we have ever faced.

However, if we fail to make the change and if that failure is systematic of a wider lack of will around the world, then we face the real risk of going above the temperature increase which would trigger unstopable and catastrophic climate change.   The Siberian tundra would melt releasing massive quantities of Methane which is an extra potent greenhouse gas.

I came to a new realisation late last night that these talks can only be described as the most important negotiations in the history of mankind.   Until my friend Paul and each house at home understands that, then there is little hope that the politicians will enter the talks with the necessary determination to tackle the issue.     I am collecting a pack of flyers today to make up a dummies guide to climate change and am returning to my friends house with intent.

 PS

Fossil of the day award today goes to Canada who yesterday trumpeted a new committment to cut their emmissions by 45% by 2050 but forgot to mention that they were now counting from a new base year of 2003 rather than 1990 which everyone else works off.          Class

Ambassador Nishimura was in good form today:

“We know this is so dangerous, we know we urgently have to act, Japan will never fail to be a front runner but please understand any serious and responsible government cannot make that decision blindfold. … I cannot understand why people encircle us, press us, instead of providing us with the necessary information as to who are coming to join us in combating this huge battle which even the dissapearance of all the Kyoto countries overnight would not solve. Without giving me this information I am scared. Without giving me this info as to who will come to this battle, I cannot aspire for as much change as I would want.”                         

He was raising the valid point that the Kyoto signatories only account for 30% of global emissions. The pressure he was under was to accept a 2008 target date for the next phase to be agreed so there would be a seamless continuation of Kyoto after 2012.

Going beyond 2008 might make sense in that George Bush would then be out of the White House but the real question is why we will we have to wait until then to see whether the Americans, Chinese and Indians are indeed ready to act.

Few of the other contributions at post 2012 Ad Hoc  Working Group generated such heat.    The Climate Action Network stuck the boot into the Canadian Government for having abandoned their committment to Kyoto.     The Saudi and Russian representatives would make you sick such is the unctuous manner in which they wrap their naked self-interest in ethical spin.

A contact group will now meet over the next few days to discuss the work plan for the group for the next year and whether a statement can be made to let the wider world know the urgency of the problem. The text of that statement will be as good a marker as any as to where this process is going.

Earlier in the day there was an excellent presentation on the ethics of climate change arranged by the Rock Ethics Institute. Their work can be found on http://rockethics.psu.edu/climate/index.htm  

Various speakers argued we need to frame the decisions on climate change in an ethical as well as a scientific and economic perspective. That there is now a growing consensus on the ethical princliples that will have be applied to the issue.  That it is wrong to wait for others to stop before acting, in the same way it would be wrong to continue robbing a bank just because other people were also robbing it at the same time.    That those who have created the problem should pay for the damage done. That this is the crucial human rights and intergenerational justice issue.

The group wants to extend the website as a live forum to analyse the presentations made by different governments to highlight the hidden unethical assumptions that underpin their arguments.

Quote of the day came from Benito Muller, a professor of Philosophy in Oxford who was arguing that a sense of fairness is an innate condition in human beings. To prove the point he recalled that the second thing almost all children learn to communicate after the first words ‘”mama  ” or “dada” is to scream “it’s not fair”.      Don’t I know.

Each day starts with a quick scan of the daily programme and its timetable of events.  As well as the official programme of events which often deal in the most minute details on the technical arrangements of the Protocol, there are a list of side events where you can hear some of the leading experts in the world give papers on different topics.

 I am going to start the day with a session on Integrating eithcs into climate change negotitions, followed by a session from the EU on its plans for Aviation, car efficiency and carbon storage and then finish off the day with a three hour session of the Ad hoc working group on what happens post 2012.   For the climate change train spotter this is as good as it gets. 

Also handed out with the daily programme is the Earth Negotiations Bulletin which gives a daily summary of the previous days events.  the report is online at www.iisd.ca/climate/cop12/ and one of the reporters is Peter Doran from Queens University Belfast who has been engaged in this sort of work for the UN for years.   

The third crucial daily leaflet is the Eco newsletter handed out by the Climate Action Network which gives a more jaundiced and witty review of proceedings which is also available on www.climatenetwork.org/eco.   

The end of a long day at a ‘in session workshop’ on what will happen post 2012 which ended with a real sense of dissapointment as none of the observors or other parties to the UN convention had any thoughts to offer on this crucial issue. It would seem everyone is holding back to see what other countires want or would be willing to do.

The star of the day was the Japonese Ambassador Nishimura, who was one of the only presenters without power point but who came up with the strongest language and best lines. That this was a deadly serious business, that if we are not willing to discuss the stabilisation of emmissions now then when will we do it? That in energy efficency we have to wring the last drop out of a dry towel and that the world currently had a mountain of wet energy towels. That we needed to be a bit more humble given the awesome might of nature.

The European Union rep was also one of the good guys in promoting a committment to a 15% - 30% cut by 2020 and a 60% - 80% cut by 2050. The effect was slightly dampened when he showed that our European Emmissions have actually risen again in the last five years and our transport figures are massively in the red.

Baddy of the day went to Saudia Arabia for the sheer cheek of the implied suggestion that they were in among the poorer developing countries in this whole process. The Canadians meanwhile were trying to patch up some of the dreadful reputation that their new Government has on the issue.

Given that much of the day was spent arguing about how we should account for historical emmissions, the last words were at least some of the best from a Keynan NGO who raised the real question as to who would own the emmissions from nature that we are in danger off triggering from the melting of the Artic Tundra or from the die-off of the Tropical rainforests?

The problem was that that contribution was followed by a stoney silence and the meeting finished half an hour early due to the lack of any willing contributors.

The registration queue snaked up to the Gates of the UN compound. We were all bunched up together waiting for the gates to open when suddenly the skies opened with a downpour. I held my own in the international scrum that developed to get out of the rain and into the registration tent. On the other side it was like being back as a first year fresher in UCD wandering lost looking for one lecture theatre or another. The UN buildings are in a very similar style to the Belfield Arts block with more water features and a surrounding landscape of red rather than brown soil.

The first plenary session was in a room with the classical circular UN sweep of desks and little nameplate for every country in the world. If we are to tackle this problem of climate change then the ‘we’ were at least all here in the one room. The COP was opened by the election of a new president, the environment minister of Keyna who gave a good speach starting with the recollection that the children in his own village have gone through a school cycle without seeing a maize crop such has been the drought they have experienced over the last five years.

Later in the morning I headed for the Climate Action Network press conference where NGOs who are attending give there daily briefing. This was followed by the EU briefing which struck a very similar note and this was then to be followed by the press briefing from the US delegation which I was most interested to hear. Just as it was about to begin it was announced that it was a briefing for the press alone. I flicked by badge over to try and cover up the red strip which identifies it as a Government party rather than a press pass, thinking that staying on would surely do no harm. Unfortunatly, a man in a crisp suit was soon asking me the ackward question as to who exactly I was working for and before you could say George W I was on my way out of the room.

The side events in these meetings are ment to be some of the most important and yesterday I sat in on two presentations on the subject of the Amazon rainforest and on global trade in Biofuels. The working day finished with the opening of the Ad hoc working group on what we will do about climate change after the first Kyoto phase finishes in 2012. The title of the group sounds very modest but in my mind it will more than any other group decide the course of mankinds future on this planet. The Maltese President for the Group could come from Central casting as a real hero. He gave a sence of authority and urgency to the opening proceedings which will not continue through most of Tuesday and Wednesday before splitting into more informal sessions.

The day was finished off by as massive party under a tent in the lawns of the centre. As things started to hot up with people starting to dance to the African bands which held central stage, one of the Irish delegation expressed a concern that this might appear too much like fun rather than work. It was quickly decided that if we are to save the planet then we also have the duty of making sure it is a good one to save. Out on the dancefloor then the only worry being when we were asked to chant back ‘Hakuna mattata’ when fears appeared we might be looking like something from an African version of a Foster and Allen top of the pops video from the mid ninteen eightees. Time for bed to recharge the batteries.

The British Airways plane to Nairobi has a good scattering of people travelling to the COP 12 conference on clmate change. The elder man with top of the range dreadlocks is a dead givaway as a NGO delegate. The middle aged man in American Indian wastecoat is also a cert. With my own clutch of briefing papers makes me as easily identifible. Sitting in the row in front of me is Sean McDonagh of the Columban fathers who has given me one of the first copies of his new book on climate change. I am squeezed between an American man reading a British tabloid on one side and an equally square Arab gentleman on my left with a big busy beard. I am not small, we are in for a very intimate eight hours. Four hours later: The American prop to my left turns out to be the head of strategy for the Union of Concerned American Scientists. He practically taught Al Gore everything there is to know on the issue of climate change. Morgan Bazilian the Energy wizard from Sustainable Energy Ireland told me the best reason to come to these conference is to pick the brains of the people you meet on the side of the formal discussions. So far so good.

Welcome to my blog from the UN Conference on Climate Change in Nairobi. I will be posting updates as the conference progresses.