The UK's Guardian is reporting a fake text in the final hours of the Durban COP17 talks. This text is complicating already super extra double overtime negotiations.
Sometimes the real rhino is hard to spot.
Showing posts with label LCA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label LCA. Show all posts
Saturday, December 10, 2011
Sometimes a rhino is not a rhino
The UK's Guardian is reporting a fake text in the final hours of the Durban COP17 talks. This text is complicating already super extra double overtime negotiations.
Sometimes the real rhino is hard to spot.
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Cancun Agreements text formalized by UNFCCC
The Cancun Agreements text has been converted to an official document (FCCC/CP/2010/7/Add.1).
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
Dec 8 LCA text: nerdy SBSTA REDD stuff
The new LCA text is out, with even more brackets on key issues. One area that has not received a lot of attending is the SBSTA mandate. In the new (and old) text, Annex III is a request to SBSTA for a REDD+ work program.
TFG believes the SBSTA mandate is a very good start (including national and sub-national modalities for key issues such as reference levels) but misses the most important work SBSTA should do in coming years.
The current SBSTA request is limited to paragraphs 67 and 68. TFG believes the text should also request SBSTA to cover MRV issues associated with results-based demonstration activities and results-based actions (that are discussed in paragraph 70). Improved language to deliver more comprehensive and coordinate technical work would go from initial designs and reference levels (67 and 68) all the way through results-based actions and MRV. SBSTA has taken years to have a good decision on REDD (especially reference levels) but must evaluate the full range of technical issues that will come in various phases in a coordinated manner. In fact, paragraphs 70 specifically refers to paragraph 67, but goes into more detail on key technical and scientific issues and MRV.
Other parts of the REDD text allow a country to use different starting phases, but if SBSTA is restricted to paras 67 and 68, then countries ready to go the fastest, and wanting the integrity of SBSTA, will have to wait. This could be accomplished by adding the following text to Annex III, paragraph (c):
…resulting from implementation of activities referred to in paragraph 67 [ …and paragraph 70 ] of this decision, consistent with….
This will ensure SBSTA develops modalities for the most important issue, the MRV of results-based demonstration activities and results-based actions.
We know that this is unlikely to change since it is not bracketed text, but if negotiations allow, such changes would ensure a more consistent (across time), equitable (countries can pick their starting phases) and supportive SBSTA process on REDD+.
TFG believes the SBSTA mandate is a very good start (including national and sub-national modalities for key issues such as reference levels) but misses the most important work SBSTA should do in coming years.
The current SBSTA request is limited to paragraphs 67 and 68. TFG believes the text should also request SBSTA to cover MRV issues associated with results-based demonstration activities and results-based actions (that are discussed in paragraph 70). Improved language to deliver more comprehensive and coordinate technical work would go from initial designs and reference levels (67 and 68) all the way through results-based actions and MRV. SBSTA has taken years to have a good decision on REDD (especially reference levels) but must evaluate the full range of technical issues that will come in various phases in a coordinated manner. In fact, paragraphs 70 specifically refers to paragraph 67, but goes into more detail on key technical and scientific issues and MRV.
Other parts of the REDD text allow a country to use different starting phases, but if SBSTA is restricted to paras 67 and 68, then countries ready to go the fastest, and wanting the integrity of SBSTA, will have to wait. This could be accomplished by adding the following text to Annex III, paragraph (c):
…resulting from implementation of activities referred to in paragraph 67 [ …and paragraph 70 ] of this decision, consistent with….
This will ensure SBSTA develops modalities for the most important issue, the MRV of results-based demonstration activities and results-based actions.
We know that this is unlikely to change since it is not bracketed text, but if negotiations allow, such changes would ensure a more consistent (across time), equitable (countries can pick their starting phases) and supportive SBSTA process on REDD+.
Monday, September 21, 2009
new reordered/consolidtaed text from UNFCCC
The UNFCCC secretariat has released the latest version of the text for a Copenhagen agreement (hyperlink in title). No new surprises, and it is still clocking in at av overweight 188 pages. The information on REDD is primarily (not only though) found 106-115.
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
AWG LCA calls for more negotiating sessions
Bonn Climate Change Talks March 2009
Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action
under the Convention (AWG-LCA 5)
Bonn, Germany 8 April 2009.
The Chair has called for new talks in 10-14 August (in Bonn) and 2-6 November (place TBA).
Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action
under the Convention (AWG-LCA 5)
Bonn, Germany 8 April 2009.
The Chair has called for new talks in 10-14 August (in Bonn) and 2-6 November (place TBA).
Friday, April 3, 2009
Latest Rainforest Coalition/Australia submissions
A few folks here at the talks and via email have asked where the latest key submissions are on REDD:
Clicking on the above title link will take you to the latest CfRN REDD submission by Belize, Central Africa Republic, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ecuador, Equatorial Guinea, Honduras, Ghana, Guyana, Kenya, Madagascar, Nepal, Nicaragua, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Tanzania, Thailand, Uganda, Vanuatu, & Viet Nam.
Also, several folks have asked where the Australia submission on REDD is. You can find it here:
http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2009/awglca5/eng/misc01a02.pdf
Clicking on the above title link will take you to the latest CfRN REDD submission by Belize, Central Africa Republic, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ecuador, Equatorial Guinea, Honduras, Ghana, Guyana, Kenya, Madagascar, Nepal, Nicaragua, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Tanzania, Thailand, Uganda, Vanuatu, & Viet Nam.
Also, several folks have asked where the Australia submission on REDD is. You can find it here:
http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2009/awglca5/eng/misc01a02.pdf
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Ecudaor asks US's Jonathan Pershing on REDD
In a LCA workshop today, Ecuador asked the United States how they saw REDD fitting into an overall package. Jonathan Pershing (the top diplomat here at the talks) answered by saying (I am paraphrasing as he speaks) "...we know forestry contributes up to 20%. It is hard to imagine a global solution...to get to an 80% reduction in greenhouse gases if we keep 20% of emissions off the table.. and we are actively exploring opportunities in this area with many countries...to address drivers of deforestation...and this clearly relates to the REDD discussions. "
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
