UN climate chief says his Christmas list has not changed

UN climate chief Yvo De Boer told press today that the climate negotiations which he had been characterizing all week in cable car terms (stopped, going, ect), had turned into a roller coaster. He said the Copenhagen Accord was "embraced" by the conference this morning. And that the Accord was a “letter of intent, a willingness to move forward." He later clarified that the conference had "taken note" of the Accord, which "is a way of recognizing that something is there but not going so far as to directly associate yourself with it." Yvo also emphasized that his sense was that almost everybody would sign up to the Accord.

Asked if Copenhagen proved you can't have a legally binding process within the UN, Yvo replied: "Inside a UN setting we have have built [with this Accord] the kernel of a long-term, response to climate change."

"You could argue it is better to address climate change within the G20. It works from an emissions point of view, but it does not work from an equity point of view of who is affected. Part of the reason why people went to the trouble of inventing the UN was so that when we address concerns, like climate change, we take everyone into account."

Yvo said, "I spent about 10 hours yesterday in a small room with President Obama, Sarkozy, Merkel, Calderon, and another 20 heads of state who were into the nitty gritty of drafting the final text of the Copenhagen Accord."

Yvo said that as a result of Copenhagen, developed countries now better appreciate that the vast majority of developing countries have no intention of letting go of the Kyoto Protocol, and consequently the need for two tracks going forward (Kyoto, and another one for the U.S. who was not party to Kyoto).

One thing Yvo did not mention was that all the countries who sign up to the Accord will have to put down on paper as part of the Accord their mitigation targets or actions in the case of developing countries--which is pretty significant for developing countries.

Obama also managed to escape Copenhagen without doing anything to give unhelpful US Senators excuses to feel like they are being dictated to by the international community. The upshot of this will make it easier for John Kerry to deliver on his guarantee of passing climate legislation in 2010, but as China only came around half way on transparency, this legislation is almost sure to contain border measures to apply carbon tariffs to Chinese imports and other major economies that shirk transparent carbon standards.

Yvo said his Christmas list of two years ago has not changed as a result of Copenhagen. At the top of the list in time for Mexico next year is a legally binding treaty that will keep emissions to levels consistent with holding temperature increases to 2 degrees C.

See the official full text of the Copenhagen Accord for yourself

http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2009/cop15/eng/l07.pdf

Key parts in my view:

2 degrees C:  We agree that deep cuts in global emissions are required according to science, and as
documented by the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report with a view to reduce global emissions so as to hold
the increase in global temperature below 2 degrees Celsius, and take action to meet this objective
consistent with science and on the basis of equity.

Memorializing rich country specific reductions: Annex I Parties commit to implement individually or jointly the quantified economywide emissions targets for 2020, to be submitted in the format given in Appendix I by Annex I Parties to the secretariat by 31 January 2010 for compilation in an INF document.

Memorializing rich country specific actions: Non-Annex I Parties to the Convention will implement mitigation actions, including those to be submitted to the secretariat by non-Annex I Parties in the format given in Appendix II by 31 January 2010, for compilation in an INF document, consistent with Article 4.1 and Article 4.7 and in the context of sustainable development. Those mitigation actions in national communications or otherwise communicated to the Secretariat will be added to the list in appendix II. Mitigation actions taken by Non-Annex I Parties will be subject to their domestic measurement, reporting and verification the result of which will be reported through their national communications every two years.

Copenhagen Green Climate Fund $30 billion then $100 billion: The collective commitment by developed countries is to provide new and additional resources, including forestry and investments through international institutions, approaching USD 30 billion for the period 2010 to 2012 with balanced allocation between adaptation and mitigation.

Copenhagen Green Climate Fund: Copenhagen Green Climate Fund : The collective
commitment by developed countries is to provide new and additional resources, including forestry and
investments through international institutions, approaching USD 30 billion for the period 2010 – 2012
with balanced allocation between adaptation and mitigation.'

1.5 degrees C: We call for an assessment of the implementation of this Accord to be completed by
2015, including in light of the Convention's ultimate objective. This would include consideration of
strengthening the long-term goal referencing various matters presented by the science, including in
relation to temperature rises of 1.5 degrees Celsius

China butts heads with US and Bolivia expires

Todd Stern, the U.S. climate envoy said this morning the US wanted the Copenhagen Accord to be considered within the context of Article 7.2 (c) which is:

"(c) Facilitate, at the request of two or more Parties, the coordination of measures adopted by them to address climate change and its effects, taking into account the differing circumstances, responsibilities and capabilities of the Parties and their respective commitments under the Convention;"

China's take is no way. They oppose the measure as they don't consider the Copenhagen Accord to qualify as "measures," which begs the question: what exactly do they consider the Copenhagen Accord to be then?

Bolivia's representaive, who has the nicest voice of any delegate this morning said they want to ensure the UNFCCC logo is not used in affiliation with the Copenhagen Accord, before begging for the meeting to close for the sake of her own human rights, as she has not slept in 48 hours.

Canada supports Copenhagen Accord and other parties' right and its rapid implementation as per US

US Chief Climate Envoy Leaving for Home

US Climate Envoy Todd Stern just said good-bye to a bunch of people and left the plenary with his suitcase on wheels.

UN SG calls Copenhagen Accord a "significant step toward a global agreement"

UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon just took the microphone on the Copenhagen Accord. He started off with a joke: "I hope our heated discussion has not helped to increase global warming." 

He got down to business: "We have taken a significant step to a global agreement to limit and reduce greenhouse gases.I believe that through this Copenhagen Accord, we will all be able to get what we need."

He said there are three test going forward:

1. We must transform this agreement into a legally binding treaty in next year.
2. We must launch the Coepnhagen Green Climate Fund ASAP to help the most vulnerable affectd by climate change and jumpstart clean energy in developing countries.
3. We need to pursue the root of higher emissions not folow the path of least reisstance. As current mitigation committments still fail to avoid the path down toward dangerous climate change.

He also said: "Never in history have so many leaders directly enaged in global negotiations of such immense complexity and importance."

Ban finishes with a call to arms: "We have risen to the challenge at this conference. Today we have taken a significzant step forward but the road ahead is still long and difficult. But it is a journey we must make together. Science demands it. The global economy needs it. And the many lives depend on it"

USA: Regarding the Copenhagen Accord, can you clarify that memebers of the conference of the parties will be notifed in wiritng of their ability to participate in this accord.

South Africa wants it to be noted that the setting in which the Copenhagen Accord was crafted was a COP (UN conference of the parties) setting. 

Solomon Islands, which stands to be under water tells Plenary that "we have put our lives in your hands, in the hands of the 25 countries that have come up with this accord. History will judge us. It is not just about finance. It is more about survival."

Papua New Guinea takes the floor and endorses the UN SG's statement. He calls the Copenhagen a quick-start mechanism, which begins to build some of the architecture needed to get going.

Bolivia lays down its position that this COP has taken note, but has not adopted the Copenhagen Accord. he suggests that the process to join Copenhagen Accord cannot be under the UN, but under Denmark or someone like that. This is going to be a sticking point.

Saudi Arabia is trying to to marginalize the Copenhagen Accord outside of the UN as well, and says it will oppose the UN COP playing any role in making it more formal than it is.

The meeting President says he is about to fall asleep after having been up for two days.

Pakistan joins consensus to take note of the Copenhagen Accord, but objects to its lack of transparency, which he says has opened a chasm between countries. He says the road to hell is paved with good intentions and demands that the Copenhagen not be used as any sort of precedent for future decisions.

China has the floor: Maybe all of us are too tired. He appears to be trying to scuttle any shred of relationship between the Accord and the UN, objecting about the Appendix of the accord, which is the most important part because that is the part that lists country's emissions targets/actions. China is worried this may confer obligations on it, which I think is the whole point, at least at some point.

The Chair's response: I am going home. Someone will replace me. Have a happy season. I am going home to a temperature of 25 C.

Venezuela: What was agreed by Venezuela is taking note, and we want it to be noted that the Accord does not enjoy consensus. We trust that the presence of the Secretary General will help parties to not use further devices or ploys to spoil this.

USA Todd Stern up: I am interested to here the comments from my colleagues from Bolivia and Saudi Arabia. I recognize that there was not consensus--there were at least 5-6 countries out of 193 countries that were not in favour of the Accord. I would also like to note that this kind of undertaking is provided for under the Convention 7.2C. This is an opt-in provision. This includes $100 billion in funding per year by 2020, and $30 billion over next three years. It is open to any party interested in participating.

Pro Takes Helm of UN Meeting: Long Live the Copenhagen Accord?

The Conference opened up with a professional this morning. “The Conference of the parties takes note of the Copenhagen accord of 18^th December 2009. The accord will be attached and list of those agreeing to the title shall be specified in the title. “Bam,” goes gavel.” Done. Nice. I am not sure exactly what this means though I think it is a victory for the Copenhagen Accord. But the floor here will have the opportunity to debate it, shortly, I hope.

8:57 AM Copenhagen Time Update: Miliband's footnote solution, China sitting on it's hands

Someone is gonna die. It's 9:04 am, and this thing is still going. I am sitting on a couch outside the Plenary, seriously worried that one of these 60-year old diplomats who has pulled three all-nighters in the past four days might just keel over. 

Right now, although I believe passionately in the UN and its ideals, this is the most screwed up meeting I have ever seen, and that is saying something for someone who has had exposure to US third party politics.

Here is where things are at:

President Obama, presumably ignorant as to the bizarre sociology of these UN meetings, screwed up big-time by going on TV and announcing a "meaningful deal" before the vast majority of countries here had even seen the text he helped hammer out. As the G-77 walked out of one of their plenary sessions, there was Obama announcing "we have a deal." Many were stunned to see this and took great exception at the breach of protocol.

Then, after pulling two-consecutive all-nighters, the Danish PM, heading up the conference convenes all the delegates, many of whom had never seen the text of the "Copenhagen Accord", and says, here you go, take a look at this and let us know your thoughts in one hour. A number of countries went ballistic, including Sudan, who strangely was one of the countries that produced the Copenhagen Accord who likened the process and document to the Holocaust.

There seems to be two serious options at the moment, and one creative way forward put forth by UK Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change Ed Miliband.

1. Adoption: The Conference of the Parties adopt the Copenhagen Accord.
2. Rejection: The Conference of the Parties chose to just include the Copenhagen Accord as a miscellaneous submission to be filed somewhere not too important, and to have a Cop 15.5 in 6 months or so.

The UN is a consensus organ, and so over the course of this meeting tonight/this morning, just one or a few parties have been able to completely hold hostage the rest of the world on moving forward.

Ed Miliband has proposed an elegant solution: Take option 1, and include as a footnote those countries that object. In effect, put your hand up if you object, and you won't get any money. 

The countries that want a 15.5 are:

• Saudi Arabia
• Nicaragua
• Bolivia
• Venezuela
• Cuba
• Tuvalu

China has been conspicuously quiet, saying nothing all night. I am getting the feeling China is not that concerned to see a deal go through. The Maldives said, without naming China outright, that in the meetings of the 25-30 leaders that produced the Copenhagen Accord, the big developing countries had played a destrictive role in nixing strong committments developed countries were willing to make because of their own unwillingness to reign in emissions. China's lead negotiator Su Wei told me that he knows the US Senate will not ratify any deal that leaves China without binding obligations, and he doesn't care too much. In his view the US Senate will come around to China's point of view at some point. As Su put it: "In China we have a saying. It is worth waiting for a feast. And we are happy to wait for this banquet."

The poor Danish Prime Minister does not look good at all. He is dangerously sleep-deprived and basically being propped up at the moment by a seasoned looking veteran diplomat, who whispers in his ear what to say. I think it is a pretty safe bet Denmark will never again apply to host another of these UN climate change meetings as long as he is Prime Minister. 

In the future, these meetings should be run by professionals who know all the players and issues, as this is not working. 

The UN honchos and Danish PM are huddled on the main plenary stage in a legal pow-wow it appears fleshing out Miliband's footnote solution. I am hoping the delegates will show some mercy, and take Miliband's elegant solution.

Copenhagen Hangs in Balance, compared to Holocaust by Sudan

It's 5:20 am. There is certainly no Copenhagen Consensus at the moment. Obama is somewhere over the Atlantic Ocean in Air Force One, and he and other world leaders, are looking like they left before the job was done. After more than hour hiatus, the meeting reconvened, with the Danish PM proposing a compromise to consider the Copenhagen Accord a submission. Nicaragua seemed to nix this. And the Danish PM, President of the Meeting, took off without further notice. Everyone is milling about, and the outcome is up in the air. This is bizarre theatre.

The Danish PM is back and mumbled something about including the Copenhagen Accord as a submission document, identifying which parties put their names to it. India has expressed concern that the Danish PM should ask those countries for permission first.

Nicaragua has withdrawn their request on behalf of them, Cuba, Venzuela and Bolivia to suspend the meeting. 

Sudan is up again, repeating their position that this document is a pox on developing countriies and the UN. Sudan is calling this a "suicide pact, an incineration pact." He just said this agreement is based on the same values that piled 6 million people into furnances in Europe."We do ask you to destroy L-9,  destroy it, delete it from the UN system completely."

Maldives has starting speaking. Sudan is back. He had not finished to tell the Danish PM in his role as Prime Minister, he has been biased, violated all the rules of transparency and fairness.

Maldives weighs in: I commend the leadership of Danish leadership. We have a real danger of UNFCCC talks going the same way as WTO talks. The science is suggesting that this cannot be allowed. We have a window of space in the next seven years to present the world climate from reaching tipping points." Maldives asks countries to adopt this document to large applause.

Canada finally. To compare this initiative to the Holocaust is profoundly offensive to me and my delegation. This remarks should be withdrawn.

Ethiopia now: on behalf of the African Union, yes, like any other multilateral discussion, the document is a compromise document. As Maldives has said, action postponed is not in the interests of people that will be hurt by climate change. 

Brice Lalonde from France is up: Heads of States representing 4 billion people worked to get this document. We are deeply wounded by the accusations and suspicions when all we did was try to break the deadlock.

Sweden for the EU: "It does represent the way forward. The reference to the Holocaust is despicable."

Senegal: We support Ethiopia, however we regret certain points not reflected in this document. 

Ed Miliband from the UK wants to speak, but his microphone doesn't work. So he has moved over to use the microphone of the US but it does not work either. It is working now. "We have two roads. There is a road of document that has been produced that has been done in good faith that is by no means perfect. It is a document that in substantive ways will make the lives of people better. It does a limited number of things, but important things. The other choice is what Ambassador Lumumba offers us. It is a choice of disgusting comparisons to the holocaust and of wrecking this conference. What will world think of us if we come out after two years with simply an information document? I urge you Mr President for this document to adopted as a Conference decision." Long applause.

The Danish President says: "Four countries oppose Miliband's proposal, so it cannot be adopted. I urge every country to sign this document."

Cuba is getting indignant, accusing the UN of blackmail.

"This paper will not be adopted," says the Danish PM.

Slovenia proposes solution: This paper could be adopted with a footnote where the countries against it are listed by names. 

Gabon says they endorse that these negotations were constructed in good faith.

Grenada greets delegates with "good morning," as it's 6:10am. There was absolutely no indication that this was an illegal process. Grenada calls on major parties to follow through on their commitments. She says I cannot sit here and see the work of my government, my PM, and my long tired self to be thrown out. I call on my brother from Sudan to rethink his conclusions and to get hold of his emotions, and I will help him. I too am unhappy. We have to help each other, not condemn each other. I encourage us to go forward. 

Japan says we are here to do our utmost to save the earth. It is shameful of ourselves condemning each other  while the whole world is watching us.

Papua New Guinea enters. "Papua New Guinea supports this document. But many of the flaws are due to us as G-77 countries ourselves. Many of the Annex 1 countries were willing to pledge deep cuts, but G-77 countries cut them out. While many of the Annex 1 countries sent their leaders, some G-77 countries sent their officials and it was these officials who struck out these commitments.Over 100 leaders have come here. The world is watching us. We support adopting this."

Todd Stern from the US now: We applaud the chair. There was broad participation from 25-30 countries including the President of the US. The President met with the leaders of China, Brazil, and South Africa to bridge important gaps. It is disappointing to see the work down there not recognized or in some cases disowned by some people who participated in it." Stern says the UN itself stands on trial on this issue.

Norway says for one week, nothing happened. But he says one step  forward is much better than two steps backward. He also takes great exception to climate aid being called a bribe. "I am not a lawyer. My mother is a lawyer, but I have no intention of being a lawyer. However, it seems that if the vast majority of countries want to move together should be able to move.

Russia also supports adopting the accord.

This thing just keeps going and going.

Update: outside the plenary with Jack Layton and Olivia Chow

I am sitting outside the Plenary Hall with Jack Layton and Olivia Chow.

The Danish PM has just introduced the text and asked the parties to review the Copenhagen Accord and to come back in one hour.

Tuvalu is not happy: "We work under the umbrella of the UN. Within the UN, we as nations are given respect large or small. We have processes to consider the matter collectively. This is called the conference of parties. This is disrespecting the UN process."

Jack Layton comments, "These guys do have a considerable stake, they're the first ones to go under water."

Tuvalu goes on: "Anything above 1.5 C spells the end of Tuvalu. Can I suggest in biblical terms, it looks like we are being offered 30 pieces of silver to betray our people and our future. Mr President: our future is not for sale. Tuvalu cannot accept this document."

Now Venezuela is not happy either. "We demand we should not suspend these talks. If we have to make a point of order by cutting our hands and drawing blood to convince you of our right to speak, we will."

Jack just came back with the new text, and unlike the version at the New York Times, the targets for countries listed in the Appendix are blank.

There are some important changes between the document that was left when Obama took off and the one that was just circulated to diplomats at the Plenary. The chart for rich countries' mitigation previously included: emissions reductions by 2020, status of the pledge and whether the pledge included land-related emissions. The new one just includes emissions reductions, base year, and the fields are all empty. 

The information for developing country mitigation lists "actions" in the new version rather than "targets."

Bolivia is unhappy as well about the methodology as they are being given a document they haven't had access to, and asked to come back and give their opinions on it in one hour. "We do not believe this is respectful. We are seeing actions in a dictatorial way. This is unacceptable."

Cuba too, predictably is unhappy. They just called Obama an Emperor. "I regret deeply the way in which you have conducted this conference. I can already tell you we will not accept this" Jack points out: "They get hit with the hurricanes, they know what the hot sea is like." 

US Jon Pershing is up next. No wait. Now Sudan is speaking. Sudan says Mr PM says I actually pushed the button when I saw Nicaragua. The Danish PM throws up his hands: "who wants to speak?"

Ok, here we have Nicaragua. They are trying to keep Kyoto alive. They are proposing a completely new agenda to suspenf Cop 15 and come back in June 2010. 

The gauntlet has been thrown down. No one adjourned the meeting, but everyone is milling about.

It looks like the hour break, and the US didn't get to speak, which is probably just as well.