COP agreement or cop-out from Lima?

A draft agreement has been sent to me.

You can download the pdf (320KB) or see it converted to html.

Let us know what you think.

UPDATE 15 DEC 2014 16:40 NZDT

Tom Harris, executive director of the International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC), writes that this document appears to be “the final long document they agreed to as the “Lima Call for Climate Action.”

So here it is (pdf, 686KB). Thanks, Tom.

Again, please let us know your thoughts.

32
Leave a Reply

avatar
14 Comment threads
18 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
4 Comment authors
Richard C (NZ)AndyRichard+C+(NZ)Richard TreadgoldAlexander+K Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
Notify of
Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Page 1. “Please recycle”

Alexander+K
Guest
Alexander+K

Recycled boilerplate from previous unsuccessful attempts to blackmail the free world at previous conferences. No doubt the team of lawyers the UN has working for them are kept fully employed. I wonder when Ban Ki Moon will reply to the scientists who sent him a letter apprising him of the actual science rather than the nonsense he loves to trot out.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

>”the team of lawyers the UN has working for them” Yes, until AR4 I didn’t know LLB was a climate science qualification. But I assume you are referring to their Office of Legal Affairs Alexander: http://legal.un.org/ola/legal_advisers.aspx Extending your vein in respect to sea level projections via points raised at JoNova: Belfast #20.2. December 14, 2014 at 1:13 pm · Reply No cheering yet. The shoalhaven council staff are trying to bring the matter up again and threatening the Councillors that they may be personally responsible for damages if they are wrong. If they don’t like a decision they try to reverse it. http://joannenova.com.au/2014/12/sydney-sea-levels-rising-at-just-6-5cm-per-century-peak-panic-is-behind-us/#comment-1640539 My amended response: Richard C (NZ) #20.2.1. December 14, 2014 at 2:11 pm · Reply Interesting Belfast – a space to watch obviously. But equally, will the IPCC collectively be held personally responsible for damages if they are wrong? And that’s not just for costs accrued by exorbitant SLR projections: ‘Billions won’t satisfy warmists’ Christopher Booker, The Sunday Telegraph, 7 December 2014 “….so carried away are the warmists by their quasi-religious belief system that, when it was again proposed in Lima that richer nations should pay poor countries $100 billion… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

What does “X/CP.20” mean in this passage? “Recalling decisions 2/CP.19 and X/CP.20 (Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage associated with Climate Change Impacts) and welcoming of the progress made in Lima, Peru, towards the implementation of the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage associated with Climate Change Impacts,” There is no CP.20 decision in respect to 2/CP.19. Therefore there is no “X” and no “progress”. This must mean that the CP decision in respect to the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage associated with Climate Change Impacts (why did they repeat that in full?) must be the CP.19 decision: Decision 2/CP.19 Warsaw international mechanism for loss and damage associated with climate change impacts 1. Establishes the Warsaw international mechanism for loss and damage, under the Cancun Adaptation Framework, subject to review at the twenty-second session of the Conference of the Parties (November–December 2016) pursuant to paragraph 15 below, to address loss and damage associated with impacts of climate change, including extreme events and slow onset events, in developing countries that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change (hereinafter referred to as the Warsaw international mechanism), and in… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Adaptation was never going to be addressed at Lima, that was deferred until December 2015 anyway: Affirming its determination to strengthen adaptation action through the protocol, another legal instrument or agreed outcome with legal force under the Convention to be adopted at the twenty-first session of the Conference of the Parties (November-December 2015), 1. Confirms that the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action shall complete the work referred to in decision 1/CP.17, paragraph 2, as early as possible in order for the Conference of the Parties at its twenty-first session to adopt a protocol, another legal instrument or an agreed outcome with legal force under the Convention applicable to all Parties; 2. Decides that the protocol, another legal instrument or agreed outcome with legal force under the Convention applicable to all Parties shall address in a balanced manner, inter alia, mitigation, adaptation, finance, technology development and transfer, and capacity-building, and transparency of action and support; The draft text they started with read: 1. Welcomes the elaboration and consideration of elements for a draft negotiating text undertaken by the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Correction

>”The draft text they started with read:”

>”All they did at Lima was to condense 3 paragraphs into 2.”

I’m both right and wrong here. Two different documents. The “draft text” referred to is:

AD HOC WORKING GROUP ON THE
DURBAN PLATFORM FOR ENHANCED ACTION
ADP.2014.12.DraftText
Advancing the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action
http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2014/adp2/eng/12drafttext.pdf

The Lima outcome is the document known variously:

Decision -/CO.20
Lima call for climate action
Further advancing the Durban Platform

Decision CP.20 paragraphs 1 and 2 carry forward the Ad Hoc Working Group’s “Enhanced Action” to Paris CP.21 Dec 2015 which is in the Annex of the document above:

Annex
Complementary information on intended nationally determined contributions of Parties [IDCPs]

However, they did condense 3 paragraphs into 2 in Decision -/CO.20.

Richard+C+(NZ)
Guest
Richard+C+(NZ)

>[IDCPs]

No (sigh), should be INDCs

Alexander+K
Guest
Alexander+K

Richard, your intentions are honorable but I suspect your wife must wonder what on earth you are spending all your time on. I have no idea why any intelligent person would wast time with this transparent and patent nonsense from Lima – why not just laugh at it and let it go?
Nonsense is nonsense is nonsense!
But I am still curious about who is going to issue the first writ when it becomes obvious and beyond doubt that ole Banky and his cohort have been seriously scamming us.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

See previous post, much (excerpts) on Decision paragraph 10 in respect to Article 2 of the UNFCCC Convention and Decision paragraph 3 in respect to Article 4 of the UNFCCC Convention pertaining to Annex I countries (includes NZ).

https://www.climateconversation.org.nz/2014/12/save-the-planet-give-us-your-money/comment-page-1/#comment-1260705

ARTICLE 2: OBJECTIVE
http://unfccc.int/essential_background/convention/background/items/1353.php

ARTICLE 4: COMMITMENTS
http://unfccc.int/essential_background/convention/background/items/1362.php

Article 4 is the big one – big difference between Objective and Commitments, the latter being highly contentious for Annex I.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

The BBC notes that there is no mention of Annex I countries in the Lima Call for Action but so what?

Annex I is still in ARTICLE 4: COMMITMENTS and paragraph 3 in the Lima Call for Action “Underscores its commitment” in respect to Article 4. The only shift is in respect to Non-Annex I i.e. “poor” or developing countries.

BBC = ‘UN climate deal in Peru ends historic North-South split’
By Matt McGrath
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-30473085

Alexander+K
Guest
Alexander+K

Richard,
Reading the BBC article makes me suspect that these conferences are carefully designed to achieve nothing and to ‘kick the can down the road’ until the next great talkfest, the attendance at each of which is the payoff for all the acivists and climate groupies who mouth all the platitudes peculiar to their religion, and who consider that anyone who does not share their religion is either mad or bad and doesn’t ‘consider the grandchildren’. One of the clues as to the collective intelligence of this religion is that they hang on every word of their icons such as Dame Vivienne Westwood, who makes the most incredibly moronic staements which she believes support her views on climate.

Andy
Guest
Andy

Just for you AK, Dame Westwood on Jonathon Ross show
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4YArRqPSzI

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Alexander. >”…these conferences are carefully designed to achieve nothing and to ‘kick the can down the road’ until the next great talkfest, the attendance at each of which is the payoff for all the acivists and climate groupies….” In respect to Lima yes, the Lima Call for Action is a nothing document and the whole shebang was just to keep the process rolling on. But the next conference in Paris is all important. Tom Harris (ICSC) echoed your sentiment in the previous post thread but points to the ADP and Paris as the real threat: Tom Harris on December 15, 2014 at 7:52 pm said: I think the purpose of Lima was to just to continue to lay the foundation for Paris. One would have thought that they could have just done this at UN HQ with a far smaller number of people, but I guess if they skipped a big COP do, there would be hell to pay with the media and activists.. It seems to me that a major goal is always to appease climate activists that they are, really this time, going to enable something significant in Paris. So, it… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Our UNFCCC homework for now until COP 21 Paris.

Pages 8 – 12 here:

AD HOC WORKING GROUP ON THE DURBAN PLATFORM FOR ENHANCED ACTION
ADP.2014.12.DraftText
Annex
Complementary information on intended nationally determined contributions of Parties
http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2014/adp2/eng/12drafttext.pdf

“Enhanced Action” on:

Mitigation,
Adaptation,
Finance,
Technology development and transfer, and
Capacity-building, and
Transparency of action and support.

ADP is the behind-the-scenes UN working group. Nothing changed at Lima in respect to them, neither was there anything on the agenda for change. The ADP was simply carried forward to Paris as was always intended.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

‘UN climate deal in Peru ends historic North-South split’

By Matt McGrath – BBC

“Green campaigners, though, are very upset with the Lima process. Too little had been achieved, too many decisions had been kicked down the road, they said. “These talks delivered basically nothing for the poor and vulnerable in developing countries,” said Harjeet Singh from Action Aid International.”

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-30473085

The major decisions were already kicked down the road before the conference began. Everyone should have known that.

But isn’t it all supposed to be about climate?

Annex I countries, including NZ, already direct aid to “poor and vulnerable in developing countries” whether climate related or not. Why should they have to direct additional aid via the UN ?

The UN Green Climate Fund is administered in Korea – Ban Ki-moon’s home country by mysterious coincidence.

The likelihood of more than a trickle of UN administrated Annex I money actually reaching its intended destination is very slim, let alone being effective when it gets there. Better then for Annex I to direct their own aid projects.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

>”The UN Green Climate Fund is administered in Korea – Ban Ki-moon’s home country by mysterious coincidence.” Host City Songdo At its October 2012 meeting, the Board took a consensus decision to select Songdo, Incheon City, Republic of Korea as the host city of the Green Climate Fund. In accordance with paragraph 22 of the Governing Instrument, this decision was endorsed by decision 6/CP.18 of the Conference of the Parties (COP) at its eighteenth session in Doha, Qatar, in December 2012 […] The selection of the Republic of Korea as the host country of the Fund was the outcome of an open and transparent process conducted by the Board. Parties to the UNFCCC were requested to submit to the Board by 15 April 2012 expressions of interest for hosting the Fund, based on the criteria set in a decision of the COP (3/CP.17, paragraph 12). They included the ability to confer and/or recognize juridical personality and legal capacity to the Fund, the ability to provide the necessary privileges and immunities to the Fund, and financial arrangements as well as administrative and logistical support offered to the Fund. Six expressions of interest were received… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

The Adaptation Fund (AF) finances projects and programmes to help developing countries adapt to the negative effects of climate change. https://www.adaptation-fund.org/ Doing better than the Green Climate Fund (GCF): AVAILABLE FUND BALANCES Adaptation Fund (Total) $277 million As of October 31, 2014 Adaptation Fund (AF): Cash Transfers Total: USD 138,664,186.00 http://fiftrustee.worldbank.org/index.php?type=cashtransferpage&ft=af Except, 11/13/2014 UN Development Programme FEES UNDP GE FEES FT23 USD 104,125 09/23/2014 IBRD as Implementing Agency FEES F-M-BZ-1-001 USD 91,000 08/18/2014 UN Development Programme FEES UNDP SB FEES FT3 USD 97,842 08/13/2014 UN Development Programme FEES UNDP PK FEES FT3 USD 45,900 07/16/2014 UN Development Programme FEES F-M-MN-1-001-3 USD 51,574 06/26/2014 UN Development Programme FEES UNDP WS FEES FT2 USD 171,025 06/10/2014 UN Development Programme FEES UNDP DJ FEES FT3 USD 66,80 06/10/2014 UN Development Programme FEES UNDP MU FEES FT2 USD 3,664 05/23/2014 UN Development Programme FEES UNDP PG FEES FT2 USD 104,293 04/29/2014 UN Development Programme FEES UNDP CK FEES FT2 USD 84,320 04/22/2014 UN Development Programme FEES UNDP ER FEES FT2 USD 103,372 04/07/2014 UN Development Programme FEES UNDP UZ FEES FT1 USD 178,099 04/07/2014 UN Development Programme FEES UNDP SC FEES FT1 USD 254,218 04/07/2014 UN Development… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Adaptation Fund (AF)
04/29/2014 IBRD as Trustee ADMBUDGT FY15 TRUSTEE BUDGET USD 803,000
04/29/2014 IBRD as Trustee ADMBUDGT FY15 TRUSTEE AUDIT USD 60,000
04/29/2014 Adaptation Fund Secretariat ADMBUDGT FY15 AF SEC BUDGET 2 USD 203,000
04/29/2014 Adaptation Fund Secretariat ADMBUDGT FY15 AF SEC BUDGET USD 3,294,808

AF FY ADM: USD 4,360,808
(US$4.4m/yr)

AF FEES 01/08/2014 – 12/11/2014 (10 months) from previous: USD 3,091,220
(US$3.7m/yr)

AF ADM+FEES: US$8m/year

AF Total Transfer 06/19/2009 – 12/11/2014 (5 yrs 5 mths): US$138.7m
(US$25.6m/yr)

AF ADM+FEES represents 31.25% of AF Total Transfers (8/25.6) i.e. 68.75% goes to recipients.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Meanwhile, the NZ spot “price on carbon” has rocketed up from $2.45 to $5.40.

Buy now because 2016 looks expensive

NZUs – May 2016 5.75 Bid 6.25 Offer 6.00 Last

https://www.commtrade.co.nz/

Good thing the govt ETS carbon price was set at only $25, otherwise the market would have been severely distorted.

Apparently Finance Minister Bill English has confirmed that Treasury is predicting carbon prices of between $10 and $165 a tonne between 2021 and 2030,

Reassuring that Treasury has such a refined knowledge of the future. What would we do without that otherwise unobtainable information?

Andy
Guest
Andy

I’d like to push the barrow out and suggest that the price of Brent Crude will be between $30 and $180 a barrel by 2020

Alexander+K
Guest
Alexander+K

Thanks for the clip, Andy.
I lived and worked in the UK for almost a decade and came home to NZ a bit over three years ago, so luminaries such as Dame Viv and Jonathon Ross are very clear in my memory – The Dame is barking mad and Jonathon is an unfunny, unprincipled , foul-mouthed person who teamed up on air with another foul-mouthed unprincipled unfunny person to do their best to destroy the lives of a much-loved and respected actor and his family. So both have less than zero credibility for me.
The Dame’s take on the warming ‘tipping point’ is almost sad it’s so silly, but for the alarmists, it was pure gold.
The Dame has been very active in recent anti-fraccing protests, in which she displays her ignorance in spectacular fashion.

Andy
Guest
Andy

For the uninitiated, the foul mouthed person you refer to is none other than Russell Brand, another of the UK’s “intelligentsia” who now appears on Newsnight and BBC Question Time.

God help us all

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

New acronyms for Paris:

NAPA – national adaptation programme of action
NAP – national adaptation plan

Page 9
http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2014/adp2/eng/12drafttext.pdf

I have a PAP (personal adaptation plan). When it gets warm I will take off my jacket.

Andy
Guest
Andy

That’s all they seem to do at these conferences, come up with yet another bit of alphabet soup that is completely impenetrable to the outside observer.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Adaption vs. adaptation Adaption and adaptation are different forms of the same word, and they share all their meanings, which include (1) the act of changing to suit new conditions, and (2) a work of art recast in a new form or medium. But the longer word, adaptation, is preferred by most publications and is much more common. Adaption is not completely absent, but it usually gives way to the longer form in edited writing. Both forms are old. The OED lists examples of adaption from as long ago as the early 17th century. Adaptation is just a little older, having come to English from French in the middle 16th century. Adaption has never been the preferred form, though, and in fact has grown less common relative to adaptation over the centuries. It’s possible that some English speakers now view adaptation and adaption as separate words each with their own uses, but any such emerging differentiation is not yet borne out in general usage. For now, at least, adaption always bears replacement with the more common form. http://grammarist.com/usage/adaption-adaptation/ Why oh why didn’t they just settle for adaption? But it gets worse, viz., “Recalling… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Hilary Ostrov at Climate Audit’s “Unprecedented” Model Discrepancy post: And while I’m here … on the “unprecedented” front … I haven’t had a chance to verify or confirm this yet via word-count, but the view from here, so to speak, is that “unprecedented” (whatever it might have meant in advocacy-speak) is falling into dis-favour and being replaced by “transformative” whatevers along with “extreme” weather. IOW, perhaps “extreme” is in the process of being “transformed” into the new, improved “unprecedented”?! To a jargon-watcher, such as I, it is an increasingly challenging task to make heads or tails of the word salads that continue to emanate from the engines known as the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP)’s and World Meteorological Organization (WMO)’s respective PR machines! http://climateaudit.org/2014/12/11/unprecedented-model-discrepancy/#comment-743724 The thread contains the now {in)famous quote from Dr Richard Betts: “It’s a bit like watching a ball bouncing down a rocky hillside. You can predict some aspects of it behaviour but not others. You can predict it will generally go downhill, and if you see a big rock in it’s path you can be reasonably confident that it will hit it and bounce off, but you can’t predict… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

Meanwhile:

‘NASA’s Orbiting Carbon Observatory shows surprising CO2 emissions in Southern Hemisphere’

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/12/20/agu14-nasas-orbiting-carbon-observatory-shows-surprising-co2-emissions-in-southern-hemisphere/

‘Nasa observatory reveals high CO2 concentrations in southern hemisphere’

http://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2014/12/20/nasa-observatory-reveals-high-co2-concentrations-in-southern-hemisphere/

# # #

Higher concentrations over Greenland than the industrialized US east coast.

Newly industrialized China exhibits marginally higher levels than the ocean above the NI of NZ and north Pacific.

South America, southern Africa, and Indonesia, should be paying everyone else “reparations”.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

And Mauna Loa, at around 400ppm now, appears to be in an area of relatively low concentration.

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

‘UNEP sails on the unchartered waters of the UN’ Hilary Ostrov (aka hro001 – The View From Here) / July 6, 2014 Not too long ago, during the rather fruitless search for something or other in the ever-growing maze of the United Nations, I had stumbled across the Dag Hammarskjöld Library where one can (at least according to today’s tagline) “Explore the World’s Organization”. During the course of retracing our path through this maze, today, my mouse and I stumbled across the following amazing discovery: [see screen cap] Forgive me for repeating what must be the most shocking understatement of the year: “The UN Charter does not specifically mention the environment or sustainable development. However, there has been increased activity in the area over the years.” As I had noted previously, this blurb seems to be a little out of date, because the so-called: “key forum for UN Member States to discuss questions related to the environment” i.e. the Commission on Sustainable Development, fondly known as the CSD for short, is in the process of being supplanted by an old/new, improved body, as I had first noted (in Feb. 2013): “Hundreds of environment… Read more »

Richard C (NZ)
Guest
Richard C (NZ)

‘Laws, Prosecution, Tax: Not for The UN Green Climate Fund?’ JoNova Another reason to shut down the UN. Fox News (via GWPF) If the GCF succeeds in its broader negotiations, not only billions but eventually trillions of dollars in climate funding activities could fall outside the scope of criminal and civilian legal actions, as well as outside examination, as the Fund, which currently holds $10 billion in funding and pledges, expands its ambitions. The shield would cover all documentation as well as the words and actions of officials and consultants involved in the activity documentation—even after they move on to other jobs. As a tasty side-benefit, the “privileges” attached to such “privileges and immunities,” as they are known in diplomatic parlance, mean that employees get their salaries tax-free. Just why the GCF needs the sweeping protections is not exactly clear. In response to questions from Fox News, Michel Smitall, a Fund spokesman, provided mostly opaque answers. “Privileges and immunities are intended to facilitate GCF activities in countries in which it operates and the GCF’s ability to use contributions by donor countries in an effective and efficient manner that serves the objectives agreed by… Read more »

Post Navigation