logo
LES MEMBRES
greenpeace
wwf
lpo
oxfam} alofa tulavu
4d
gret
helio
hespul
cler
amis de la terre
agir pour l'environnement
fnaut
fub
solar generation
reseau sortir du nucleaire
cniid
wecf
associations locales

MAILING LISTE

La liste climat du RAC-F vous permet de recevoir et d’envoyer des informations sur les changements climatiques.
S'abonner Se désabonner
attention ça chauffe
can
illustration
Accueil > Politiques et mesures > Négociations internationales > Les Conférences Annuelles des Parties (COP/MOP) > Les sessions intermédiaires et autres actualités > SB 24 Bonn - 2006 > Intervention du CAN International lors du dialogue sur les actions de long terme au sein de la Convention
Intervention du CAN International lors du dialogue sur les actions de long terme au sein de la Convention
date 17 mai 2006
texte+ texte- google twitter facebook

Climate Action Network International

Intervention at the Dialogue on long-term cooperative action to address climate change by enhancing the implementation of the Convention

16th May 2005
Delivered by Mozaharul Alam

Distinguished delegates, we meet here in Bonn, charged by the international community with developing plans for the next stage of international action on climate change. In Montreal last November we agreed a series of interrelated processes to advance action in combating climate change, of which this Dialogue is an important part. Before turning to the substance of what we think this process needs to do, I must raise some fundamental issues.
Distinguished delegates, we are worried and fearful. The scientific community is alarmed by recent trends in the climate system. The climate is changing around us and the seas are rising faster.

The international negotiations on climate change started nearly 15 years ago, with the first meeting in Washington DC in the USA. Fifteen years later, the loss of ice from the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets is accelerating due to warming. Sea level rise is accelerating due to warming. Extreme weather events are an ever-increasing threat, due to warming. Even as we meet, Typhoon Chanchu is bearing down on mainland China, after having killed nearly 40 people in the Phillipines.
I come from Bangladesh and I am fearful of the consequences for a hundred million of my fellow citiyens, should the current acceleration of ice loss continue.
Let us be clear and speak what we feel to be the truth : the science points to the fact that we are faced with a planetary emergency and we are rapidly running out of time to deal with it. Let me respectfully submit that “Dialog” is much too soft a word to describe what should be happening here.
Dealing with global warming is not a one billion dollar issue. It is not a problem for boutique programmes of the World Bank, the US DoE, or any other single agency. Changing the direction of energy and technology investments in the scale required to prevent dangerous climate change means swinging hundreds of billions of dollars of investments into clean technologies.
Let me turn now to the process at hand and the most important things, that it needs to achieve to meet the scale and scope of the external threat, in the next 18 months, by COP13.

- What the Dialogue needs to do

The Dialogue, in our view must complement and help to accelerate the process to be initiated on Wednesday to develop deeper emission reductions for the developed countries for the 2013-2017 period. It will also take place in the context of the review of the Kyoto Protocol under its Article 9 that Parties are required to start at COP/MOP2 and on which submissions have been invited by September. These processes must be finished no later than 2009 in order for the second commitment period to start smoothly.
We see four main questions for the Dialogue to answer in the course of its work over the next 18 months or so.

1) What is needed to implement the ultimate objective of the Convention ?
A discussion on what might be dangerous climate change and an analysis of what global and regional emission reductions are needed to avoid this, is very important to both short and long term action. We realize that agreement between Parties on a specific dangerous level is unlikely at this stage, but we also believe that an organised debate about this issue is long overdue. Some Parties have argued that it is premature to have this discussion : I would ask - is it premature to ask what it would take to ensure that my country, Bangladesh, can physically exist in 100, 200 or 500 years’ time ?

2) How can the synergies between sustainable development goals and climate policy be captured ?
There is a lot of agreement that there are synergies between sustainable development and climate policy, however little - very little - has been done to explore the potential for international cooperation to help capture these synergies. For example between clean energy, human health and climate change.

3) What is needed to massively expand the scale of market mechanisms for greenhouse gas reductions ?
We have growing experience with using market mechanisms for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Anyone who has watched the development of the international carbon market in the last two years or so, with the entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol and the operation of the initial phase of the EU trading scheme, can see the power of this system. The fuel that drives it is the emission reduction targets. These create the opportunity for investments in developing countries.
We need to massively expand this system so that it becomes a vehicle for both reducing emissions globally and creating the market potential for large scale investment in clean and sustainable technologies in developing countries.

4) What is needed to provide sufficient resources to meet adaptation needs for unavoidable climate change ?
The scale of adaptation needs is set to grow rapidly in the next one or two decades. At present the infrastructure and resources available are grossly inadequate to the scale of the task. Water resources are one example where widespread problems are projected particularly in regions which are fed by snow melt such as western Canada, and large parts of south and central Asia and China and in the Andes. Significant cross border issues can also be anticipated due to reductions in river flow. There are many other examples. The Dialogue could explore ways to build on the existing adaptation framework and develop a model for funding the large investments that would be required, through levies on emission trading, for example.

- Conclusion

Distinguished Delegates, I have outlined four areas of work which we think the Dialogue should pursue as a matter of urgency and that would help accelerate the work under the Kyoto Protocol.

This process needs to be structured to produce conclusions and recommendations. We do not think that single workshop on each theme will be adequate. All 4 themes need detailed continuous consideration over the course of the process.

In the remaining hours of this Dialogue today you, the Parties, need to agree a work plan that can convincingly deliver by COP13 on the tasks we have outlined here.

- I want to end with two messages

First, adaptation only is not an option. We heard the COP President say that the Arctic must adapt. But we heard nothing about the need for emission reduction to prevent its destruction. For so many issues we will run out of adaptation possibilities very quickly unless we limit climate change. For many communities, even the EU 2 degree Celsius target is too much warming.

Secondly, there will be no market for greenhouse gas reductions without deep reductions in the next commitment period. The last fifteen years has proven that talk and voluntary actions do not reduce emissions.

I thank you for your attention.