Brussels/London - Representatives of nearly 200 nations will
assemble at the end of November in Durban for their annual summit on climate
change.
Following the failure of talks in Copenhagen in 2009 and
Cancun in 2010 to agree a successor to the Kyoto Protocol - the only global
accord on tackling climate change - diplomats and non-governmental
organisations have been managing expectations for the Durban summit.
Rather than a breakthrough, they have emphasised incremental
progress and the improvement of existing mechanisms for monitoring and managing
climate change.
All observers agree time has run out to get a new version of
Kyoto in place before the first commitment period expires at the end of next
year.
The European Union has said the world might not be able to
agree on a binding climate deal until 2015.
"After Copenhagen, there will probably never be another
attempt to agree one global deal all at once," Tim Gore, international
climate change policy adviser at Oxfam, told Reuters. "Durban will be
another stepping stone."
"If we get an EU commitment to continue Kyoto, a signal
from the rest of the world that they will undertake legal commitments in the
future and delivery in the meantime ... then we'll be making progress towards a
sophisticated global architecture for fighting climate change," he said.
The following looks into the issues for debate at the 17th
Conference of the Parties (COP17) to the United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change (UNFCCC).
What is the Kyoto Protocol?
The Kyoto Protocol is a UNFCCC pact aimed at fighting global
warming. It was adopted in 1997 and entered into force in 2005. According to
the UNFCCC website, 193 states have signed and ratified the protocol.
It subjects 37 richer countries, known as Annex 1 countries,
to legally binding targets for cutting greenhouse gas emissions. In total, the
cuts seek a minimum 5% reduction from 1990 levels in Annex 1 countries before
the end of the first commitment period in 2012.
The United States never ratified the treaty. Developing countries have since become major emitters, with China overtaking the United States to become the world's biggest producer of carbon.
Poorer nations want the Kyoto Protocol to be extended, but
many rich nations say a broader pact is needed to include all the big
polluters. Russia, Japan and Canada have said they will not sign up for a
second commitment period unless the biggest emitters do too.
In the United States, the environment has become a political
battleground between Republicans and President Barack Obama's Democratic Party.
At least until the next presidential election is over next
year, it is politically impossible for the United States to sign up to a new
Kyoto.
Moreover, neither China nor the United States is willing to
agree to a new deal unless the other does so first.
The EU, which has taken a lead in adopting targets to cut
carbon and increase the share of renewable energy, has said it is open to
signing up for a second commitment period, but on condition the major emitters
give evidence of a firm intention to join in.
Otherwise it will not work, says the bloc, which is responsible for a mere 11% of global carbon emissions.
"It is clear a number of partners are moving away from the protocol and we would probably end up being the only one in the Kyoto club," said Laurence Graff, head of the international and inter-institutional relations unit at the European Commission's climate action unit.
Can we keep climate on the agenda?
News coverage of the environment has shrunk as the world has
obsessively turned its attention to solving an international financial crisis,
and companies' focus is the bottom line over the short term.
As evidence of a lack of government will to strike a global
deal on cutting greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, some analysts have cited a
pitched battle between the EU and major airlines.
Airlines have taken their resistance to EU plans to make
them pay for their carbon emissions under the EU's Emissions Trading Scheme (EU
ETS) to the courts and a UN body, the International Civil Aviation Organisation.
"Of all sectors, aviation is the most global and by far
the easiest to set up a global GHG reduction programme - especially if market
mechanisms are used," said Russel Mills, global director for energy and
climate policy at Dow Chemical Co.
"So when we see the world striving to make progress
rather than block progress on aviation, we will know that enough of the world's
political leaders are sufficiently serious about tackling climate change to be
confident that a global agreement is in reach."
How can developing nations be persuaded to sign up?
To help bridge the gap between rich and poor, progress in
negotiations so far has concentrated on mechanisms that could persuade poorer
nations to sign up to a new global protocol without feeling they are being
penalised.
In Cancun, countries committed to raising $100bn annually by
2020 to help developing nations adapt to the cost of limiting climate change.
They also agreed to set up a Green Climate Fund which would be a major vehicle
for raising and spending climate funds.
In Durban, delegates are expected to debate recommendations
for the design of the fund. They need to establish progress on where the money
will come from.
Non-governmental organisations Oxfam and the World Wildlife
Fund have jointly proposed raising funds by applying a carbon price to
international shipping, which they say is less problematic than seeking a
carbon contribution from the airline industry.
Can we get sufficient pledges?
To achieve the target of 2 degrees of warming, emissions
need to be cut by between 80% and 95%, scientists say.
Pledges on the table from Cancun totalled a roughly 60%
reduction, which Artur Runge-Metzger, director of the international and climate
strategy directorate at the EU Commission, said would translate into capping
global warming at 3 to 4.5 degrees.
Oxfam's climate change policy adviser Tim Gore said the
concern was that without a "top down" Kyoto Protocol, all that would
be left would be the bottom-up pledging process, with no guarantee that would
be enough.
What are AAU/CER/EUA and other abbreviations?
The UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol have spawned a host of
abbreviations and instruments for offsetting carbon emissions.
Last week, EU Commission officials in Brussels said Durban
should focus on closing loopholes in such mechanisms that should not be carried
over into a second commitment period.
The EU ETS is the biggest carbon market, on which EU
allowances, or EUAs, are traded. Under the scheme, utilities and heavy industry
can produce a fixed amount of carbon.
Companies that produce above the prescribed limit can buy
extra carbon credits, while those which pump less carbon than their cap are
allowed to trade their surplus.
At government level, nations are entitled to produce a
certain level of emissions, known as assigned amounts.
Those who do not produce up to their limit have assigned
amount units (AAUs) to spare, which they can sell to countries that have
produced more carbon than their entitlement as a way of still meeting their
Kyoto commitments.
Following industrial collapse, some nations, such as Russia,
have huge stockpiles of AAUs.
They have the potential to depress international carbon
markets, which have already plunged to levels far below those needed to
preserve what the EU has labelled "environmental integrity".
The EU is divided on this issue. At its environment council
in October, it could only come up with vague wording.
On one side of the argument, Poland, which has a large
surplus of AAUs it could sell for a profit on international markets, would be
happy to carry its entire allowance into a second commitment period, EU sources
said.
Denmark, keen to promote the greenest of energy agendas,
believes none should be carried beyond 2012. South Africa, host of the Durban
talks, has proposed a 1% carry-over of AAUs.
Another carbon instrument that can be bought and sold and
counted towards meeting Kyoto targets is the certified emission reduction (CER)
credit.
CERs can be earned via the clean development mechanism
(CDM), which allows a country to implement an emissions reduction project in
developing countries.
China has been the biggest beneficiary of the CDMs.
The EU, the biggest buyer of CERs, has said it will not
accept CERs generated by Chinese projects once the current phase of its ETS
ends in 2012, although projects already registered will remain valid.