<http://www.iisd.ca/>   Earth Negotiations Bulletin

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .     
 A Reporting Service for Environment and Development Negotiations

 

PDF Format
 Spanish Version
French Version
Japanese Version
IISD RS
web page <http://www.iisd.ca/climate/sb26/> 
 <http://www.iisd.ca/download/pdf/enb12329e.pdf> 
 <http://www.iisd.ca/vol12/enb12329s.html> 
 <http://www.iisd.ca/vol12/enb12329f.html> 
 <http://www.iisd.ca/climate/sb26/japanese/enb12329j.pdf> 


Published by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) 
<http://iisd.ca> 

 

Vol. 12 No. 329
Tuesday, 15 May 2007

SB 26 HIGHLIGHTS:

MONDAY, 14 MAY 2007

On Monday, the third session of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Further Commitments 
for Annex I Parties under the Kyoto Protocol (AWG) began. The AWG spent most of 
the day in a round-table discussion on the mitigation potentials of policies, 
measures and technologies. In addition, contact groups and informal 
consultations under the SBSTA and SBI continued on a variety of issues, 
including: the Adaptation Fund; deforestation; IPCC guidelines for national 
greenhouses gas inventories; research and systematic observation; small-scale 
afforestation and reforestation CDM project activities; and technology transfer.

AWG

On Monday morning, AWG Chair Leon Charles (Grenada) opened the meeting and 
identified the need to bridge traditional divides and work in an atmosphere of 
trust and confidence. He called for a clear signal that the AWG is on track to 
complete its work on time. Parties then adopted the agenda (FCCC/KP/AWG/2007/1 
<http://unfccc.int/documentation/documents/advanced_search/items/3594.php?rec=j&priref=600004192#beg>
 ). South Africa, for the G-77/CHINA, called for “deep and ambitious” 
commitments from Annex I parties. The EU drew attention to low-cost mitigation 
potential identified by IPCC WGIII and stressed that “costs of action are small 
compared to costs of inaction.” Switzerland, for the ENVIRONMENTAL INTEGRITY 
GROUP, called for mitigation efforts that take into account national 
circumstances.

ROUND-TABLE DISCUSSION: The round-table discussion on mitigation potentials of 
policies, measures and technologies was held during the morning and afternoon 
sessions. The morning session focused on providing an overview and on 
cross-cutting issues. The afternoon session was divided into three parts, 
focused on energy efficiency, non-carbon dioxide greenhouse gas emissions and 
sinks, and consolidation of sectoral approaches.   

Overview and Cross-Cutting Issues: Bert Metz, IPCC, outlined long-term 
mitigation and stabilization scenarios illustrating that in order for global 
carbon dioxide emissions to stabilize, they would have to peak and then decline 
against a backdrop of a baseline showing a strong upward trend. 

Artur Runge-Metzger, European Commission, discussed adequacy, feasibility and 
fairness as cross-cutting issues for the EU. He stressed the need for 
industrialized countries to take the lead, and noted the EU’s commitment to 
reduce emissions by 20% by 2020. 

Arne Mogren, Vattenfall AB, presented a bottom-up analysis of abatement 
potential using a 2°C increase scenario, noting substantial mitigation 
potential at negative cost, fragmentation of opportunities across all sectors 
and regions, and the need to begin immediately. He underscored clear carbon 
price and policies that promote trust among market players and the need for 
coordinated support for key policies.

Harald Dovland, Norway, outlined Norway’s goal of reaching a 100% reduction in 
domestic emissions by 2050 (that is, becoming carbon neutral), highlighting the 
wide array of measures needed, including taxes, an emissions trading scheme and 
carbon capture and storage. He emphasized feasibility of implementation.

Fareed Al-Asaly, Saudi Arabia, highlighted the “spillover” effects from the 
implementation of climate change response measures and the economic 
consequences of energy policy choices by Annex I parties on fuel exporting 
nations. 

Markus Amann, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, outlined 
synergies between greenhouse gas and air pollution control in Europe. He gave 
an overview of the GAINS (Greenhouse Gas and Air Pollution Interactions and 
Synergies) model used to assist in the search for pollution and control 
strategies that maximize benefits across all scales. 

In the question and answer session, participants addressed, inter alia, joint 
fulfillment of commitments within the EU, spillover effects of mitigation, and 
the agricultural sector’s contribution.

On a question about ways to maximize the mitigation potential of policies, 
technologies and measures to promote structural change, Metz noted that 
least-cost options are not always the most convenient as a first choice, while 
Dovland emphasized co-benefits and the use of various economic instruments, and 
Runge-Metzger highlighted stakeholder involvement.

Energy Efficiency: Richard Baron, International Energy Agency, labeled energy 
efficiency as the “first fuel” due to its vast potential to reduce energy use 
and emissions cost-effectively. Noting that many barriers exist, however, he 
said government leadership is required to achieve change. 

Kazuhiko Hombu, Japan, discussed Japan’s policies to become the world’s most 
energy-efficient country. He noted significant progress to date, and a new goal 
of further improving energy efficiency by 30% by 2030 compared with 2003. He 
concluded, inter alia, that “evaluation of global emissions reduction potential 
is important.” 

Hugi Olafsson, Iceland, outlined his country’s successful energy shift from 
coal to renewables, noting the long-time horizon required to develop capacity 
and technology, and a new strategy looking beyond the energy sector. 

In the question-and-answer session, SOUTH AFRICA questioned Hombu’s reference 
to global emissions and CHINA stressed that the AWG’s focus should be on Annex 
I parties. Hombu noted that the global situation is changing rapidly with 
dramatic increases in emissions from developing countries, and that Japan would 
like to cooperate with other countries on energy efficiency. 

Non-Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: Discussing the 
agricultural sector, Louis Verchot, World Agroforestry Centre, identified 
several mitigation opportunities, such as reducing deforestation and the use of 
fertilizers. 

Indicating that 50% of New Zealand’s emissions originate from the agricultural 
sector, Harry Clark, New Zealand, outlined opportunities for and barriers to 
mitigating emissions from grazing animals in the short, medium and long term. 

During the ensuing discussion, CANADA outlined its mitigation measures in the 
agricultural sector, including a possible emissions trading scheme. Verchot 
drew attention to the link between biofuels and deforestation, and identified 
agroforestry as an area with potential synergies between adaptation and 
mitigation. Clark explained that for efficient producers, such as New Zealand, 
where profit margins are small, mitigation policies must be either low cost or 
have co-benefits. 

Consolidation of Sectoral Approaches: Bert Metz, IPCC, outlined national 
policies and instruments available to governments to create incentives for 
different stakeholders, including regulations and charges, tradable permits, 
financial incentives and voluntary agreements. He observed that the most 
effective policies make new technologies attractive, and that voluntary 
agreements have not yet delivered significant emissions reductions as a result 
of being loosely applied and not rigorously designed. 

Nicole Wilke, EU, gave an overview of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) 
which she said is a simple, cost-effective, sector-wide approach to reducing 
emissions and is a major player in the global carbon market. 

Thomas Kolly, Switzerland, highlighted Switzerland's efforts to reduce 
emissions over a number of sectors, adding that his country had among the 
lowest per capita emissions in the OECD, but faced a looming electricity supply 
gap in the future. 

In the ensuing discussion, delegates raised questions concerning increasing the 
level of technological investment by Annex I parties, expanding the EU ETS to 
include other gases, and the merits of regulatory approaches as opposed to 
voluntary agreements.

CONTACT GROUPS AND INFORMAL CONSULTATIONS

ADAPTATION FUND: During a morning contact group meeting, Co-Chair Uosukainen 
introduced a draft COP/MOP decision focusing on eligibility criteria, priority 
areas and monetizing the share of proceeds. He explained that the text would be 
forwarded to Bali as part of the overall package on the Adaptation Fund and 
that its final adoption would only take place after everything else, including 
institutional arrangements, has been agreed. Delegates agreed to the text as 
presented, and the G-77/CHINA and the EU commended the constructive spirit of 
the negotiations. 

In the afternoon, delegates reconvened for informal consultations and exchanged 
views on institutional arrangements, including the composition of the governing 
body. The Co-Chairs also presented draft SBI conclusions, which will be 
discussed on Tuesday.

DEFORESTATION: During informal consultations, Co-Chair Rosland presented draft 
SBSTA conclusions prepared by the Co-Chairs based on drafting group discussions 
and subsequent statements by parties. Delegates made general comments on the 
preambular paragraphs, focusing on the inclusion of forest degradation and 
forest stabilization and conservation, and on the groups’ mandate. Delegates 
also undertook a line-by-line discussion on the first two operative paragraphs. 
They discussed, inter alia, wording acknowledging ongoing and country-specific 
efforts, and reference to voluntary participation in further efforts. 

IPCC GUIDELINES FOR NATIONAL GREENHOUSE GAS INVENTORIES: During informal 
consultations, Co-Chair Elhassan presented revised text and parties made 
progress, accepting four paragraphs after clarifying language. Outstanding 
paragraphs that will be taken up on Tuesday address: methodological issues; the 
2008 workshop on experiences and issues related to the IPCC 2006 guidelines; 
and the importance of continuous improvements to greenhouse gas inventories. 

RESEARCH AND SYSTEMATIC OBSERVATION: Informal consultations resumed on Monday 
morning, with delegates discussing text on the role of the dialogue with 
regards to research gaps and research capacity constraints in developing 
countries. While developing countries had previously preferred text noting that 
a dialogue “would identify” such gaps, developed countries had sought 
alternatives such as “could identify” or “would review.” Parties agreed to a 
compromise proposal that noted “the importance of such a dialogue to identify” 
gaps. Delegates also discussed a series of proposals by one developed country, 
with other developed and developing countries rejecting text that would have 
assumed that the dialogue process will not start until SBSTA 28. 

With all outstanding issues resolved, Co-Chair Castellari immediately 
reconvened the formal contact group, which approved the text with minor 
editorial corrections.

SMALL-SCALE AFFORESTATION AND REFORESTATION UNDER THE CDM: In the contract 
group, Co-Chair Akahori gave an overview of the discussions on implications of 
a possible change in the limit for small-scale afforestation and reforestation 
under the CDM. Parties considered draft SBSTA conclusions previously agreed 
during informal consultations, agreeing to the text with minor editorial 
changes and thus completing their work.

TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER: In informal consultations held throughout the afternoon, 
parties discussed the functions of the constituted body under its terms of 
reference. Clear differences remained over whether the constituted body should 
report to the SBSTA, SBI or COP. Some developed countries favored reporting to 
the SBSTA, with specific relevant matters taken up by the SBI. However, 
developing countries wanted the constituted body and its work to be considered 
by SBSTA, SBI and the COP. Text regarding financing options was also 
considered, with some progress made in merging text from different paragraphs. 
However, no final agreement was reached. Informal consultations will continue 
on Tuesday.

IN THE CORRIDORS

Delegates seemed satisfied that several contact groups had wrapped up their 
work by Monday afternoon, although some concerns were surfacing about the group 
working on technology transfer. With divisions remaining on the constituted 
body and reporting process, some participants were expressing fears that it 
might not be resolved in time for Bali. “I’m concerned about the growing 
workload we’re accumulating for COP 13 and COP/MOP 3,” said one.

Some participants were also discussing the slow pace of negotiations on 
deforestation, with frustration surfacing among a few. As one delegate said, 
“How many commas does it take to save a rainforest?” 

On a lighter note, a number of delegates were claiming to have noticed a sudden 
“coolness” in relations between certain EU and Umbrella Group officials. On 
further inquiry, however, it turned out that the “chill in the air” was due to 
Canada’s victory over Finland to take the world title in ice hockey, rather 
than to any diplomatic dispute. In one informal group, one loyal Finnish chair 
even proposed a minute’s silence to mark his team’s defeat.
 

This issue of the Earth Negotiations Bulletin © <[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > is written and edited by Asheline Appleton, 
Suzanne Carter, María Gutiérrez Ph.D., Kati Kulovesi and Chris Spence. The 
Digital Editor is Dan Birchall. The Editor is Pamela S. Chasek, Ph.D. <[EMAIL 
PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >. The Director of IISD Reporting 
Services is Langston James “Kimo” Goree VI <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL 
PROTECTED]> >. The Sustaining Donors of the Bulletin are the United Kingdom 
(through the Department for International Development – DFID), the Government 
of the United States of America (through the Department of State Bureau of 
Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs), the Government 
of Canada (through CIDA), the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the 
Government of Germany (through the German Federal Ministry of Environment - 
BMU, and the German Federal Ministry of Development Cooperation - BMZ), the 
Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the European Commission (DG-ENV) and 
the Italian Ministry for the Environment and Territory General Directorate for 
Nature Protection. General Support for the Bulletin during 2007 is provided by 
the Swiss Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN), the Norwegian Ministry of 
Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Environment, the Government of Australia, 
the Austrian Federal Ministry for the Environment, the Ministry of Environment 
of Sweden, the New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, SWAN 
International, the Japanese Ministry of Environment (through the Institute for 
Global Environmental Strategies - IGES) and the Japanese Ministry of Economy, 
Trade and Industry (through the Global Industrial and Social Progress Research 
Institute - GISPRI). Funding for translation of the Earth Negotiations Bulletin 
into French has been provided by the International Organization of the 
Francophonie (IOF) and the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Funding for the 
translation of the Earth Negotiations Bulletin into Spanish has been provided 
by the Ministry of Environment of Spain. The opinions expressed in the Earth 
Negotiations Bulletin are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect 
the views of IISD or other donors. Excerpts from the Earth Negotiations 
Bulletin may be used in non-commercial publications with appropriate academic 
citation. For information on the Bulletin, including requests to provide 
reporting services, contact the Director of IISD Reporting Services at <[EMAIL 
PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >, +1-646-536-7556 or 212 East 47th St. 
#21F, New York, NY 10017, USA. The ENB Team at SB 26 can be contacted by e-mail 
at <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >. 

You are currently subscribed to enb as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Subscribe to IISD Reporting Services' free newsletters and lists for 
environment and sustainable development policy professionals at 
http://www.iisd.ca/email/subscribe.htm

Reply via email to