Banner Advertiser

Monday, December 17, 2007

[vinnomot] Bali Climate Change Conference + Trade & Investment

NEWS Bulletin from Indian Society For Sustainable Agriculture And Rural Development
****************************** ***************
 
1. Climate Roadmap - Bali meet defers emission cut issue
2. India moots global enterprise for mitigation tech
3. India calls for assistance to combat climate change
4. Citizen's forum gearing up to assess situation aftermath Bali
5. Bali Climate conference has a message for rural community
6. Don't link climate with trade at WTO, India tells West                     
7. Can the environment and trade tango? ---The US and EU proposal to introduce freer trade in green goods and services on the WTO agenda meets with opposition at the climate change conference in Bali
------------------------------ ------
 
Climate Roadmap
 
Bali meet defers emission cut issue
 
 
ASHOK B SHARMA
Posted online: Saturday , December 15, 2007 at 1912 hrs IST
 
The world leaders agreed to negotiate a new pact by 2009 for reducing the impact of global warming. The 13th Conference of Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change which ended in Bali in Indonesia on Saturday failed to quantify the emission cuts needed to reduce the impact of global warming due to strong opposition by US joined by Canada and Japan.
 
The new climate pact would replace the Kyoto Protocol which is likely to expire by 2012. Negotiations are expected to begin in April 2008 to finalise the agenda for the Copanhagen meeting in 2009.
 
Instead of agreeing to a moderate proposal put forth by the European Union calling for emission cut by 25% to 40% below 1990 levels by 2020, the US tried to rope in emerging economies like India and China to commit emission cuts. Developing countries including India and the G-77 supported the EU proposal. The differences was so intense that it could not be resolved by late evening on Friday and the conference ran into an extra day on Saturday, resulting in a dramatic finish.
 
The developing countries also had the support of Australia after the recent change of the government in that country. But Canada joined the US lobby after Australia quit its fold.
 
The world leaders resolved to have a new climate treaty by 2009, after US backed down in a battle over the wording supported by developing nations and EU. The US stand had drawn loud boos and sharp floor rebukes - "If you are not willing to lead, then get out of the way!" one delegate demanded - before Undersecretary of State Paula Dobriansky reversed her position, allowing the adoption of the so-called 'Bali Roadmap'.
 
The UN climate chief Yvo de Boor termed it as 'a real breakthrough'.
 
The developing nations urged that technological help from rich nations and other issues needed greater recognition in the document. In an apparent resolution, India and others suggested minor adjustments to the text, backed by the EU, that encouraged monitoring of technological transfer to make sure rich countries were meeting that need. But the United States objected, calling for further talks, and only relented when, in an uproar, delegates by turns criticized and pleaded with Dobriansky to reverse course.
 
The Bali conference, however, adopted a resolution on adaptation fund to help poor nations to cope with damage from climate change impact like droughts, extreme weather conditions or rising seas. The Adaptation Fund now comprises only about $36 million but might rise to $1-$5 billion a year by 2030 if investments in green technology in developing nations surges. The fund distinguished the responsibilities of the Global Environment Facility and the World Bank. The fund would have a 16-member board largely from developing countries and would stat operating from 2008.
 
Another area where the conference resolved was on preservation of tropical forests. A pay-and-preserve scheme known as reducing emissions from deforestation in developing countries (REDD) aims to allow poorer nations from 2013 to sell carbon offsets to rich countries in return for not burning their tropical forests. It recognized the urgent need to take further action to cut carbon and methane emissions from tropical forests. The draft decision encourages parties to undertake pilot projects to address the main causes of deforestation.
 
The Bali conference postponed until next year any consideration of a plan to fund an untested technology which captures and buries the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide, emitted from power plants that burn fossil fuels. Some countries want capture and storage to qualify for carbon offsets for slowing global warming. It also failed to agree whether or not to allow companies to sell carbon offsets from destroying new production of powerful greenhouse gases called hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs). Benefiting factories have been the biggest winners under a UN scheme to reward companies which cut greenhouse gas emissions.
------------------------------ --
 
13th Conference of Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, Bali, Indonesia, Dec 2007 
 
India moots global enterprise for mitigation tech
 
 
ASHOK B SHARMA
Posted online: Thursday , December 13, 2007 at 2011 hrs IST
 
India mooted the proposal of setting up of a global enterprise for mitigation technologies (GEM) at the 13th Conference of Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in Bali on Thursday.
 
Speaking at the roundtable discussion on climate change, the Indian science and technology minister, Kapil Sibal suggested "the global challenge to combat global warming needs a global response. Much like the human genome project, the global community might consider a human GEM project:- a Global Enterprise for Mitigation technologies".
 
He said that India believed in three major elements - appropriate funding modalities and approaches, a facilitative IPR environment and enhancing the absorptive capacity within developing countries. The G-77+China have already put forward a proposal for the creation of a new multilateral technology cooperation fund that would finance the development, deployment, diffusion and transfer of technologies for both mitigation and adaptation to developing countries and India supported this proposal, he said.
 
Sibal said : "technology is a mixed blessing – while it is often the source of our problems, it also holds the promise of enduring solutions. In our move towards a low-carbon Economy, technology has a vital role to play, and therefore it is quite right that mitigation technologies engage significantly the attention of policy-makers and scientists".
 
Technology may now be developed jointly, like through bi-national or multi-national efforts, or it may also be developed by new ways of public-private partnership. Many of these mechanisms were being adopted in India, and have demonstrated significant success, he said.
 
Observing that one of the main barriers to technology adoption lies in the poor absorptive capacities of developing countries, Sibal said that technology diffusion cannot be forced through the harmonization of standards. Standards and norms must reflect the development levels of where they would be deployed.
 
The approach needs to be further elaborated to include the existing capacities for in-house technology development and technology adoption/absorption. Based on such a country-driven approach, future modalities for development, transfer and adoption of technologies in developing countries should be identified, he said.
 
In the same breadth, however, Sibal pointed out that some developing countries, including India were developing appropriate technologies. "Today, an Indian company sells an electric car in many European countries and I was happy to see Members of Parliament of the UK driving it in London," he said and added that such technology transfers were taking place from South to South.
 
Other panelists in the round table were Ghana deputy minister, Maxwell Jumah, Andy Karsner from US Department of Energy, Stigson,- president of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, Stigson and representatives of the Global Environment Facility (GEF). Sibal's speech also triggered a number of interventions from the floor as well.
 
However the US, even while acknowledging the collaborative R&D with India in climate change mitigation observed that legal and commercial frameworks within developing countries were the main constraints for diffusion of technologies. The IPR of advanced technologies lie in the private sector and the Companies perforce look for compensation for investments in research.
 
The officiating chairman of the round table even while agreeing with the rationale of protection of IPRs referred to Sibal's speech. A facilitative IPR regime, which Sibal had argued, that balances rewards for innovators with the common good of humankind was the need of the hour. This may be done through a system of regulated royalties to innovators for deployment in developing countries, he said.
 
Such an approach has been adopted successfully in the case of pharmaceutical technologies for the benefit of HIV/AIDS victims in developing countries. If there were a moral imperative to adopt such an approach in the case of pharmaceuticals the moral case of a similar approach for saving our planet was even more compelling, he said.
------------------------------ -----------------
 
India calls for assistance to combat climate change
 
 
ASHOK B SHARMA
Posted online: Wednesday, December 12, 2007 at 1957 hrs IST
 
India has pleaded for financial assistances to developing countries for equipping them to develop capacities to become climate resilient.
 
The Indian science and technology minister, Kapil Sibal while speaking at the 13th conference of parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC) in Bali in Indonesia said : "Developing countries must equip themselves to develop capacities to become climate resilient. For this, we require technology solutions and financial resources at an accelerated rate to cope with and adapt to the inevitability of increased global warming in the coming decades."
 
He said that estimates of adaptation costs for developing countries ran into several tens of billions of US dollars on an annual basis.
 
"I hope that there is clear recognition by all concerned that these have to be met through new and additional monies and not by re-appropriation of funds meant for development. Resource mobilization of this magnitude requires that we tap all possible sources, including the carbon market and make full use of the potential from all the Kyoto flexibility mechanisms," he said.
 
Sibal said that the intellectual property rights (IPRs) regime must balance rewards for innovators with the common good of humankind. Standards and norms must reflect the development levels of where they are being deployed, he said and called for technology transfer at cheaper rates.
 
He complimented the Bali agenda for bringing technology transfer for implementation. "Mere discussion is not enough. We need to reach decisions. Absence of decisions only reinforces the perception that there is lack of will on the part of the developed countries to fulfill their commitments. We need to reach consensus on technology transfer and capacity-building – two issues that are really central to the global response to climate change," he said.
 
He said that negotiations under the Kyoto Protocol for quantified, time bound and substantial GHG reductions by developed countries post 2012 should be completed by 2009.
 
Sibal reiterated Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh's offer at the G8 summit in Heiligendamm that India's per capita GHG emissions would at no stage exceed the per capita GHG emissions of developed countries even as we pursue our economic development. India would be launching world's largest afforestation project covering six million hectare of degraded forest land at an investment of over $ 1.5 billion, he said.
 
"Our per capita emission of carbon dioxide is amongst the lowest in the world at around 1 ton per annum as against a world average of 4 tons. Nevertheless we have been taking measures that inherently promote sustainable development," he said.
 
Quoting the recent UNDP human development report, Sibal said that historical emissions accounted for 1100 tonne of carbon dioxide per-capita for some developed countries as compared to 23 tonne for India. "It is absolutely imperative that this excessive usage ends and we move to a paradigm of equal per-capita entitlements," he said.
 
Bali conference must also focus on urgent action for enhanced implementation of the UNFCC. Adaptation and technology cooperation, forestry issues including afforestation, sustainable lifestyle patterns, sustainable consumption levels and financial arrangements were the key to fully address the issues of global warming, he said.
 
Sibal criticized the developed world for failing in their commitments to take the lead in reducing GHG emissions. The figures tell a very different story, he said and added "since 2000 emissions of all Annex I Parties have increased in aggregate by 2.6%. And, if EIT countries are excluded, the rise since 1990 has been 11%. "
 
Moreover, with a single exception, he said "no Annex I Party has given any indication of the range by which they would reduce their emissions in the second commitment period under the Kyoto Protocol. This must change."
 
Sibal further said : "We are concerned at the attempts to create a new framework, which may result in the dilution of specific and time bound commitments on emission reductions by developed countries. This should not be allowed to happen. Any such dilution would have disastrous and irreversible consequences for future generations. We must not fail their trust."
 
Making a case for India's development, Sibal said that 300 million people lived in the country on less than $ one a day. We need to improve their quality of life and we need to do that urgently. To stagger and slow down the pace of improving human development for those living with such limited pecuniary means was unacceptable and energy was the sine qua non to development, he said and added that that 600 million people in India do not have access to electricity.
------------------------------ ---------
 
Citizen's forum gearing up to assess situation aftermath Bali
 
 
ASHOK B SHARMA
Posted online: Monday , December 17, 2007 at 0201 hrs IST
 
The Citizens Global Platform (India) in response to the Bali declaration has said, the issues of climate change should be strategically made a very serious issue with wider awareness campaign at all levels—local community, children and youth in every corner of the country—and efforts, to address the impacts of climate change from the grass root level to policy level should be encouraged.
 
CGP-I is part of the global initiative by civil society actors in Tanzania and Finland, Brazil and open to all those interested in global issues.
 
The public transport system should be encouraged to reduce carbon emission. People should be mobilized to boycott products that are not eco-friendly and products from countries that are not taking efforts to cut down their emission. CGP-I is convening a global conference in Nagpur on December 29, this year to take stock of the situation aftermath the Bali conference, said the convenor, Y David
 
Efforts should be made to cut emissions in the energy sector. Instead of coal, there can be a strong expansion of the use of the renewable energy and other low carbon energy sources like solar energy, wind energy that could meet India's energy demand, said the CGP-I coordinator, Mukesh Bahuguna.
 
CGP-I alleged that the State has become the manager of water resources and has taken over the role from communities and households and is promoting privatization of water resources and is embarking upon construction of large dams and development projects affecting the eco-system. Alternatively, CPG suggested small and micro-harvesting systems as an integral part of basin wise planning and local self-government (panchayats) vested with the responsibility of equitable water sharing.
 
It urged that rivers in India and all over the world should be protected as nature's property and utmost care has to be given to control pollution in water bodies. More investment should be made on research for locally available eco-friendly energy sources and national institutes should be established to encourage initiatives for alternate eco-friendly energy sources. Climate change mitigation must not be viewed in isolation from other highly important challenges, such as equitable access to energy, clean water, alleviating poverty and achieving economic growth in emerging markets.
 
CGP-India group called for an integrated approach to the problem from the production to consumption level .The real solution to global warming lies in the change in the paradigm of development. There should be a total change in the present model of production which encourages competition and exploitation. Development should be people-centered, eco-friendly for every creation of nature to sustain its livelihood.
------------------------------ -----------------
 
Bali Climate conference has a message for rural community
 
 
ASHOK B SHARMA
Posted online: Monday , December 17, 2007 at 0158 hrs IST
 
The 13th Conference of Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) which concluded in Bali in Indonesia on last Saturday was a partial success. It has some good message for the rural community.
 
The world leaders recognised that 20% of the global emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs) can be contained by forestation. The programme, Reducing Emissions From Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) aims to compensate the developing countries in the tropical region to maintain their forests and discourages deforestation. It allows developing countries to sell carbon offsets to rich countries in return for not burning their tropical forests from 2013.
 
REDD initiative is the need of the hour when largescale deforestation is taking place across the world for urbanisation, oil palm, soyabean and bio-fuel crop plantation.
 
The Bali conference also stressed upon the urgent need to cut carbon and methane emissions from tropical forests.
 
The Bali conference also adopted a resolution on adaptation fund to help poor nations to cope with damage from climate change impact like droughts, extreme weather conditions or rising seas. The Adaptation Fund now comprises only about $36 million but might rise to $1-$5 billion a year by 2030, if investments in green technology in developing nations surges. The fund distinguished the responsibilities of the Global Environment Facility and the World Bank. The fund would have a 16-member board largely from developing countries and would start operating from 2008.
 
Senior researchers of the United Nations Development Fund (UNDP) had urged the developed countries to urgently discuss adaptation funds as the key to solution of the problems. The Lead author of the recent UNDP report, Kevin Watkins said that as per estimate $86 billion were needed annually. "The figure looks large, but actually it is only 0.2% of the rich countries GDP," he said and added that adaptation fund sourced from multilateral funding in the last two years was only $26 million—the amount spent by UK alone on flood control for a week.
 
A group of small island communities led by Biotani Indonesia Foundation has urged that the adaptation fund should include a special corpus to cover their initiatives.
 
The Bali conference succeeded in adopting a resolution on technology tranfer and also Its monitoring. It, however, failed address the vital issue of cut in GHG emissions and deferred it till 2009.
 
It also postponed until next year any consideration of a plan to fund an untested technology which captures and buries the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide, emitted from power plants that burn fossil fuels.
 
It also failed to agree whether or not to allow companies to sell carbon offsets from destroying new production of powerful greenhouse gases called hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs). Benefiting factories have been the biggest winners under a UN scheme to reward companies which cut greenhouse gas emissions.
------------------------------ ---
 
Don't link climate with trade at WTO, India tells West
 
 
Economy Bureau
Posted online: Wednesday, December 12, 2007 at 0009 hrs IST
 
New Delhi, Dec 11 India on Tuesday reiterated that it was against any effort by developed countries to link environmental issues with trade at the World Trade Organisation, particularly in the ongoing Doha Round negotiations.
 
Commerce and industry minister Kamal Nath said India was opposed to attempts by rich nations to bring issues of climate change to WTO through any backdoor route—like the UN Conference on Climate Change. He said developed countries are trying to force unnecessary obligations on developing countries. According to him, issues on climate change are "stand alone" ones and must not be linked to trade.
 
Nath's comments come close on the heels of WTO director general Pascal Lamy's statement that an agreement at the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change must send a signal to WTO on how the latter's rules may be employed in the fight against climate change.
 
In a speech at the Informal Trade Ministers' Dialogue on Climate Change in Bali, Indonesia, Lamy had said the Doha negotiations on environmental goods and services could deliver "a double-win for some of our members: a win for the environment and a win for trade". He said the WTO tool box of rules "can prove valuable in the fight against climate change" but awaits "a truly global consensus on how best to tackle the issue".
 
Lamy said there was no doubt that an immediate contribution that the WTO can make to the fight against climate change is to indeed open Markets to clean technology and services. He added that the Doha Round of trade negotiations offered an avenue for expanded access to products such as scrubbers, air filters and energy management services. "But, as can be expected, what is and is not an environmental good is a topic that is hotly debated," he said.
 
Recently, the US and the EU had proposed at the Doha Round that to counter climate change, tariffs must be done away with on 43 environment-friendly goods and inking a broader pact on climate-friendly goods and services for developed and advanced developing countries. But India and Brazil had criticised the move saying it was a backdoor attempt by the rich nations to increase sales of their goods.
------------------------------ -----
 
Can the environment and trade tango?
 
The US and EU proposal to introduce freer trade in green goods and services on the WTO agenda meets with opposition at the climate change conference in Bali
 
 
ASHOK B SHARMA
Posted online: Monday , December 10, 2007 at 0055 hrs IST
 
The US and the European Union (EU) are proposing the introduction of freer trade in green goods and services in the WTO agenda. It prompted a meeting of trade ministers on December 8 on the sidelines of the UN climate change conference in Bali.
 
According to OECD, global market for environmental goods and services is estimated at more than $550 billion a year, out of which green services account for 65% and green goods 35%. The EU accounts for 30% of this market.
 
The US-EU joint proposal has invited severe criticism from environmentalists and trade advocacy groups, which allege that it is based on a recent World Bank proposal that suggested "huge gains in trade volumes" from 3.6% to 63.6%. While some of them say that there is no need to introduce an additional proposal when those on the table have not yet been resolved. Developed countries are not yet eager to open up their Markets for goods from developing countries. They are also not prepared to reduce their level of farm subsidy and support. The introduction of the new proposals will only complicate and delay the process of trade negotiations, they say.
 
Environmental groups have criticised the US by saying the country, which has not signed the Kyoto Protocol and other environment treaties, has no right to suggest how other countries should deal with the situation.
 
India has already made its position clear by opposing the introduction of environmental agenda in trade negotiations. India has said that the criteria of per capita emission by countries should be considered, if the developing countries are called upon to make emission cuts. Union commerce minister Kamal Nath has opposed the idea of terming India as an emerging economy.
 
"We are still a developing country with a large number of poor people," he said.
 
According to one indicator in the OECD report, released recently in Paris, India is the world's third largest Economy behind the US and China.
 
The US-EU proposal made on November 30, 2007, is a two-tier process for much freer trade in "green" goods and services as part of the Doha Round of negotiation. The first step suggests an agreement to liberalise trade by reducing tariffs in at least 43 goods with clear environmental benefits drawn from a list prepared by the World Bank. The list includes solar panels, wind mill turbines, clean coal and energy-efficient lighting. The US is now shifting to clean coal technologies as global prices of crude oil are firming up.
 
In the second process, the proposal suggested more far-reaching environmental goods and services agreement (EGSA) to be negotiated by the WTO members which would foresee further binding commitments to eliminate tariffs and non-tariff barriers in trade in green technologies. In services, highly ambitious and comprehensive commitments would be undertaken to address environmental and climate change challenges such as waste management. Developing countries would be asked to make contributions proportionate to their level of development.
 
Intellectual property right is an issue in trade as far as green technologies are concerned. The developed countries have already failed in their assurance to transfer clean energy technologies, and the funds to finance it which was agreed upon at the Rio Earth Summit. Clean technologies with high price tag of intellectual property rights would make it difficult for developing countries to address the problems of climate change. Even in San Francisco Bay Area of California, there is no consensus within the industry about the necessity for global monopoly patents on important new clean energy technologies.
 
The reduction or elimination of tariff barriers on green goods and services as suggested by the US-EU proposal would severely affect the developing countries that have either developed some of these technologies or are in the process of development. It would be better to leave the option of applied tariff reductions to countries that want to mitigate climate change rather than making the tariff reduction binding.
 
Government action is more important in mitigating climate change, rather than emphasis on trade. Government action like placing a price on greenhouse gas emission, while trade rules will minimise government action or incentives. Cost internalisation can come in many forms, including caps and/or taxes on carbon, renewable energy criteria, or even energy-efficiency standards. The imperative to internalise carbon costs should compel policymakers to protect and expand their policy space so that they have the freedom to enact necessary.
 
The US-EU proposal in the name of "breakthrough" priorities for a Doha deal include the opening of Markets for its energy services Companies like Halliburton in countries with large oil and gas reserves. So any benefits from trade in clean technologies would have to be offset with the WTO deepening world's dependence on fossil fuels.
 
Even though trade in cargo is fuelled by one of the dirtiest of all energy sources (bunker fuel), the US-EU proposal has not questioned the inherently increasing carbon footprint that will result from shipping. The UNFCCC is more competent to address the issues of climate change than the WTO.
 
As suggested in the background papers for trade ministers meeting in Bali, one area where trade policy could reduce its restraints on climate policy is by increasing flexibilities to allow many forms of public support needed to accelerate the research, development and deployment of clean, efficient, energy technologies.
 
The background paper also proposed a discussion on "non-tariff barriers to investment", which could cover zoning codes, tax incentives, operating permits, or just about any measure governments enact that impact investment. "Non-tariff barriers" have too often, in recent trade policies, implied the legal protections for the environment or community development. Again, trade policy makers must keep away from restricting governments from internalising costs in energy investment and production today.
 
According to International Energy Agency, $22 trillion investment in new energy infrastructure is required for the next 25 years to meet what it calls "runaway demand" for energy led by China and India. However with the likely carbon pricing regime in different countries, investors are uncertain about their future. Even OPEC's recent Riyadh Declaration has asked the oil-importing countries to clarify their future demand for petroleum.
 
The massive bio-fuel programme backed by huge subsidy across the world has also become controversial. The recent UNCTAD annual report said that such bio-fuel programmes in Europe and US have distorted global trade and skyrocketed  the prices of grains. It apprehended that massive cultivation of bio-fuel crops would displace food crops from cultivation and create food security problem. The Nobel prize winning chemist, Paul Crutzen, best known for his work on ozone layer has concluded that bio-fuels could increase global warming with laughing gas.
 
Leading scientists like David Pimentel of Cornell University, Tad Patzek of University of California, Florian Siegert, managing director, Remote Sensing Solutions GmbH , Munich, Mario Giampietro of Institute of Environmental Sciences, Barcelona and Helmut Haberl of Klagenfurt University, Austria have questioned the very basis of the contention of the IPCC report that bio-fuel programme causes a reduction in carbon dioxide emission.
 
The mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, who was in Delhi recently said that bio-fuels do not reduce emissions to the extent desired. London has prepared its own Climate Change Action Plan to deal with the intention of reducing 60% of the city's emission by 2025. According to the action plan, London is to promote low-carbon vehicles with hybrid fuel system which cut transport emissions by up to 4 to 5 million tonne .''Carbon dioxide emission from road transport would fall by as much as 30% if people simply bought the most fuel efficient car in each class,'' the action plan said.
------------------------------ --------

DELETE button is history. Unlimited mail storage is just a click away. __._,_.___

Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___