Talks went on until about 4am this morning over bunkers and a range of other topics that needed to be addresses such as agriculture, technology transfer, commitments etc.
Although Connie Hedegaard said the contact groups would reconvene later it appears they were not and the texts, most of which is in square brackets has been passed to the ministers. (Connie still presides over some of the work, just not the COP)
It is in their hands, though it could be a hot potato. However some interesting notes from sources:
The European Union’s desire for a 20% cut is in the bunker text [albeit in square brackets]
There are also points on carbon leakage.
There IS a consensus that the issues get pushed to the IMO and ICAO for development.
And a suggestion that there should be a report back to the UNFCCC in 2011.
But there was also no consensus on what should happen to the next.
It could be used in the text for a new protocol, but there has been no conclusion what to do with the text. The ministers are now deciding what to do…… the final decision is theirs and it might be made in the few minutes to midnight.
Cleaning up at the end of a long two weeks
Well, with the show now over, Copenhagen is trying to return to normal.
The world now has the ‘Copenhagen Accord’. http://unfccc.int/files/meetings/cop_15/application/pdf/cop15_cph_auv.pdf
This is a three page document where the heads of state present in Copenhagen agree to a range of rather straight forward facts such as agreeing climate change is one of the greatest challenges and a strong political will to do something about it.
There were a lot of words said and promises made but the impact of shipping? Well it seems the outcome could well be the IMO gets the chance to prove itself by default.
Paragraph 9 of the text reads
“To this end a high level panel will be established under the guidance of and accountable to the Conference of the Parties to study the contribution of the potential sources of revenue, including alternative sources of finance, towards meetng this goal”
earlier in the text there is reference to scaled up funding, which will amount to $30bn for the next three years which is ramped up to $100bn from the developed countries by 2020 to address the needs of developing countries.
There is mention of a Copenhagen Green Climate Fund which will be used as a financial operating entity to effectively administer the funds.
Are these two issues (assessing alternative sources of revenue and the climate fund) the indirect references to how shipping could be used as a source of revenue to help mitigation and adaptation to climate change?
Finally there is a call for an assessment of the implementation of the Copenhagen Accord to be completed by 2015, which could include strengthening measures to meet the increased challenge of stopping a 1.5 degree rise in temperature (the accord accepts the 2 degree rise as being the limiting factor).
It’s over to the IMO to prove its ability to put something meaningful in place before the end of 2014 – although the European Parliament has already said it could include shipping in its emissions trading scheme by 2012 if there has been no development on an international level by then.
This is the last post from COP15. We will be analysing the aftermath of Copenhagen in Lloyd’s List this week, looking both at what the IMO will now do moving forward and getting expert opinion on how the shipping industry is likely to be impacted.