page 1
page 2
page 3
page 4
page 5
page 6
page 7
page 8
page 9
page 10
page 11
page 12
page 13
page 14
page 15
page 16
page 17
page 18
page 19
page 20
page 21
page 22
page 23
page 24
page 25
page 26
page 27
page 28
page 29
page 30
page 31
page 32
page 33
page 34
page 35
page 36
page 37
page 38
page 39
page 40
page 41
page 42
page 43
page 44
page 45
page 46
page 47
page 48
page 49
page 50
page 51
page 52
page 53
page 54
page 55
page 56
page 57
page 58
page 59
page 60
page 61
page 62
page 63
page 64
page 65
page 66
page 67
page 68
page 69
page 70
page 71
page 72
page 73
page 74
page 75
page 76
page 77
page 78
page 79
page 80
page 81
page 82
page 83
page 84
page 85
page 86
page 87
page 88
page 89
page 90
page 91
page 92
page 93
page 94
page 95
page 96
page 97
page 98
page 99
page 100
page 101
page 102
page 103
page 104
page 105
page 106
page 107
page 108
page 109
page 110
page 111
page 112
page 113
page 114
page 115
page 116
page 117
page 118
page 119
page 120
page 121
page 122
page 123
page 124
page 125
page 126
page 127
page 128
page 129
page 130
page 131
page 132
page 133
page 134
page 135
page 136
page 137
page 138
page 139
page 140
page 141
page 142
page 143
page 144
page 145
page 146
page 147
page 148
page 149
page 150
page 151
page 152
page 153
page 154
page 155
page 156
page 157
page 158

GLOBAL VOICES029Below: Connie HedegaardKorea and China are all applying or preparing their ownemission trading systems.The EU's emissions trading system (EU ETS) is a "capand trade" system covering the emissions of more than11,000 heavy power and industrial installations. Anannually decreasing emission cap applies to the wholeof these installations. Within this cap, companiesreceive emission allowances which they can sell to orbuy from one another as needed. Every year, allinstallations covered have to surrender one allowance forevery tonne of CO2 emitted. If a company reduces itsemissions, it can keep the spare allowances to cover itsfuture needs or else sell them to another company thatis short of allowances. The flexibility that trading bringsensures that emissions are cut where it costs least to doso. Since 2005, annual average emissions perinstallation have gone down by more than 8 per cent.As of next year, the EU ETS will also include aviationemissions from all flights to and from European airports.As much as the EU prefers global action, we cannotdefend that aviation is exempted from contributingbecause they cannot agree internationally. This is whythe EU decided to take this step forward in 2008 whilewe will continue to fight for global regulation of aviationlike at the next UN climate negotiations in Durban.Energy efficiency is another important tool for reducingemissions, which is increasingly applied across theworld. Energy-related emissions account for two thirdsof global emissions. In the EU, the 27 member stateshave committed to improving the EU's overall energyefficiency by 20 per cent. The EU's partners in China, India and the US are alsotaking measures to reduce energy consumption. Energyefficiency is about cutting high energy costs; it is aboutsecuring energy supply; but it also greatly contributes totackling global warming. Meanwhile, investments inclean energy rose globally in 2010 to set a new record ofUS$243 billion, a 30 per cent increase over 2009 -mainly in Europe and Asia. In its authoritative reportabout renewable energy, the IPCC recently showed thatthe world sits on an enormous untapped reserve ofrenewable energy, which could meet as much as 80 percent of the world's energy supplies and reduce theworld's greenhouse gas emissions by up to one third. Itis an excellent example of how climate action iscontributing to securing economic growth and jobs. Theclean energy race is on, and this is good for climate. Letus build on these positive actions across the world tomake the Durban talks a success. Again, reaching an ambitious global agreement onclimate action which bridges the gap between thecurrent pledges and the agreed goal of keeping globalwarming below 2°C unfortunately does not seem to beon the cards for Durban. Neither is it realistic to expectindustrialised countries to commit to a secondcommitment under the Kyoto protocol, as many callfor. Japan, Canada and Russia have now made clearthat they do not intend to be part of the secondcommitment period under the Kyoto protocol. As forthe EU, we are willing to consider a new Kyotocommitment, but only as part of a broader packagewhere important Kyoto rules are improved; new marketmechanisms are created; and other major emitters alsocommit to doing their fair share. Let us be clear on this: a second Kyoto period with avery limited number of Parties participating is clearlyinsufficient to solve the problem of global warming,still less if only the EU, representing barely 11 per centof global emissions, was to sign up for it. Let us insteadtry to get all major emitters on board for a futurelegally-binding global agreement on climate change. InDurban, we should be able to agree on a clear roadmapand timeline which will help us to achieve acomprehensive, robust and legally-binding frameworkfor climate action over the coming years. If we can achieve this, the COP in Durban will serve asa reference point for future climate negotiations. n

he challenge of climate change wouldneed to be met essentially throughcoordination between variousstakeholders which would includegovernments, NGOs, business and civil society. The forthcoming 17th Conference of the Parties(COP17) to be held in Durban would be an importantoccasion for all these stakeholders to evaluate optionsthat are available in mobilising finance, facilitating thedevelopment and dissemination of clean technologies,and taking in hand a set of actions including bothadaptation to the impacts of climate change andmitigating the emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs)in different parts of the globe. The Fourth AssessmentReport (AR4) of the Intergovernmental Panel onClimate Change (IPCC) projected different scenarios ofclimate change including an assessment of impacts onseveral sectors of the economy. Actions to deal with the challenge of climate changewould need to be based on scientific knowledge whichis provided through the collective efforts of thousandsof scientists working under the umbrella of the IPCC.In its 23 years of existence, the IPCC has brought outfour comprehensive assessment reports as well asseveral special reports and technical papers focusingon specific subjects. Currently the IPCC is engaged in the preparation of the Fifth Assessment Report (AR5), having recently completed a special report on "RenewableEnergy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation". By the time COP17 is held, the IPCC would also havecompleted a Special Report on "Managing the Risks ofExtreme Events and Disasters to Advance ClimateChange Adaptation".The writing process of the IPCC's Fifth AssessmentReport (AR5) is well under way to produce a strong,robust and comprehensive report which advances ourknowledge and understanding of climate changesignificantly beyond what we already know; thoughwhat we know already on the basis of the AR4 isenough for us to justify adequate, timely andpurposeful action to deal with the growing challenge ofclimate change.Indeed, the fact that the climate of the Earth ischanging is now accepted as a scientific reality whichhas major implications for the structure and process ofdevelopment. The Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) ofthe IPCC clearly states that "Warming of the climatesystem is unequivocal, as is now evident fromobservations of increases in global average air andocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow andice and rising global average sea level". The AR4 alsostates that "most of the observed increase on globalaverage temperatures since the mid-twentieth centuryis very likely due to the observed increase inanthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations".In light of this, societies can respond to climatechange by adapting to its impacts and by reducingGHG emissions through mitigation measures,thereby reducing the rate and magnitude of change.The capacity to adapt and mitigate is dependent onsocio-economic and environmental circumstances,and the availability of information and technology.Neither adaptation nor mitigation alone can avoid allclimate change impacts; however, they cancomplement each other and significantly reduce therisks of climate change. Adaptation can reduce vulnerability to climate changein the short and long-term, while many studies showCLIMATE SCIENCE ANDINTERNATIONAL NEGOTIATIONS030GLOBAL VOICESDR R.K. PACHAURI, CHAIRMAN, INTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL ON CLIMATE CHANGE (IPCC) DIRECTOR-GENERAL, THE ENERGY & RESOURCES INSTITUTE (TERI)DIRECTOR, YALE CLIMATE AND ENERGY INSTITUTE (YCEI)T