Divisions over money between rich
and poor countries re-emerged as nations submitted their plans for
tackling climate change to the UN.
India, the last big emitter to publish its contribution, said it would need $2.5 trillion to meet its targets.
The Philippines said that without adequate climate compensation, their cuts in emissions wouldn't happen.
The UN says the plans increase the likelihood of a strong global treaty.
148 countries, out of a total of 196, have met a UN deadline for submitting a plan, termed an Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC).
These
INDCs cover close to 90% of global emissions of carbon dioxide. The
commitments will form the centrepiece of a new global agreement on
climate change that nations hope to agree in Paris in December.
Independent analysts at the Climate Action Tracker said that the plans, when added up, meant the world was on track for temperature rises of 2.7 degrees C above pre-industrial levels.
This is above the 2 degree target generally accepted as
the threshold for dangerous climate change. But it is a significant
improvement on a previous assessment of 3.1 degrees, made when fewer
plans had been submitted.
India's
contribution, which promised to reduce the carbon intensity of their
emissions but didn't commit to peaking their CO2, drew praise from
around the world.
"It's highly significant that India is joining
the ranks of so many other developed and developing countries in putting
serious commitments on the table ahead of the Paris climate talks,"
said former UK environment minister Richard Benyon MP.
Scary numbers
But many environmentalists were critical, saying the plan would see a "phenomenal increase" in the use of coal.
"We're especially disappointed to not see a concrete renewable target," said Pujarini Sen from Greenpeace India.
"They
are talking about 40% of electric power coming from non-fossil sources
by 2030. This is not 40% renewable energy, it includes nukes, it
includes large dams."
The plan says that India's transition will cost $2.5 trillion, a "scary number" according to one observer.
It
is unclear how much of this money will come from India's own resources
and how much from the international community and investment.
In their written submission, India's proposed climate actions
appear to be contingent on getting much of this money from richer
countries: "The successful implementation of INDC is contingent upon an
ambitious global agreement including additional means of implementation
to be provided by developed country parties."
Developed countries have committed to $100bn funding for developing
countries to deal with climate change by 2020, but India's environment
minister suggested the bill was going to a lot bigger than that.
"I
am telling the world that the bill for climate action for the world is
not just $100bn, it is in trillions of dollars per year," said Prakash
Javadekar.
"Countries will take up their own responsibility but
the world which is historically responsible for carbon emissions, what
we are suffering today, the climate change, they must at least walk the
talk on $100bn."
Some observers believe that India and others are
using the INDCs to begin the negotiation process and to highlight how
important money is, especially to developing countries.
"The thing
that what has the least clarity in this process is the finance issue,"
said Liz Gallagher from environmental think-tank E3G.
"They are
kind of using the INDCs to really deliver that message. It's a big prod
to the developed countries to wake up because they haven't sorted this
yet."
Several countries in their submissions also pointed to the question of loss and damage.
This issue has become highly contentious
in recent years as developing countries have sought some form of
compensation for the ongoing impacts of a changing climate. The richer
nations have strongly resisted this idea, fearing a legal liability.
The Philippines was quite clear in linking their plans to slash emissions by 70% by 2030 to getting money for loss and damage.
"The
Philippine INDC assumes that loss and damages from climate change and
extreme events will not require diversion of substantial resources for
rehabilitation and reconstruction thereby adversely affecting the
country's capacity to meet national development targets," they said in
their submission.
Other countries have put a figure in their INDCs
on the amount of loss and damage they have suffered in recent years.
Serbia, for example, says that in the period between 2000 and 2015 they
suffered losses of 5bn euros thanks to floods and droughts.
This focus on loss and damage means that it is likely to feature heavily in the negotiations in Paris.
"There
are some legal red lines for many countries, including the US, around
the form of compensation and what that would mean," said Liz Gallagher.
"But
as a rational and a political choice, loss and damage has to be at the
heart of the agreement and that is going to be an important challenge."
Negotiators will meet in Bonn later this month to review a draft of a new deal ahead of the Paris meeting a month later.
No comments:
Post a Comment