Author: Paige Andrews

African nations protest leaked documents: "We will defend ourselves, we will not die in silence!" (Image by: Ruth Brandt )

Chaos has broken out in Copenhagen as delegates respond to leaked documents that reveal what is believed to be a draft of the agreement which will be signed next week by world leaders. This draft text strongly favors rich nations and threatens to sideline the UN’s future role in climate change negotiations.

The document is being referred to as the “Danish text” which has, until now, been secretly worked on by a group called the “circle of commitment”, although rumoured to include the United States, United Kingdom, and Denmark. This text was only revealed to a few countries since its finalization this week.

The leaked documents reveal that these leaders plan to sign an agreement that would essentially abandon the Kyoto protocol’s principle of placing the majority of responsibility of firm target agreements and financing in the hands of the rich nations who are the most responsible for CO2 emissions and would instead hold poor countries accountable to a range of actions in exchange for funding.

The text is understood to contain the following elements: it lessens the UN role in climate finance and handing it, instead, to the Global Environment Facility (GEF); it creates a new category of developing countries to be called “the most vulnerable”, thus dividing the developing block even further; and forcing developing countries to agree to emission cuts alongside developed countries yet would allow rich countries to emit 2.67 tonnes of carbon per person in 2050 while limiting poor countries to 1.44 tonnes. While bad news for developing countries, the leaked text reveals that the agreement also seeks to hold temperature rises to the 2C target established by the IPCC and allocate $10billion per year for developing country adaptation during the period of 2012-2015.

The leaked document contains many blanks and areas to be filled in as the text is fleshed out. While considered a draft text, African nations are in an uproar and are now protesting inside the Bella Centre. Many developing countries are interpreting the leaked text as an attempt by rich countries to muscle through an agreement next week when Ministers and Heads of State arrive in Copenhagen without their knowledge, bypassing the UN process.

Ice sculpture in Darling Harbour. Image by Kirsten Spry.

There are only a few months left until leaders of the international community convene in Copenhagen to agree upon a replacement for the Kyoto Protocol. Prime Minister Rudd has already declared that Australia will not go to the convention empty-handed. So far, Australia’s climate change legislation has faced some hurdles with its CPRS bill. However, with the recent approval of the renewable energy target, there is hope that Rudd will be able to keep his promise.

Following the defeat of Prime Minister Rudd’s Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS) 42-30 by the Senate on August 13th, the Renewable Energy Target was split from Rudd’s controversial carbon trading legislation. The new legislation – calling for a 20 per cent renewable energy target – was subsequently approved when brought before the Senate again last Friday.

This new target matches the renewable energy target set by the European Union and means that, within a decade, all Australian households could be powered by renewable energy. While the Greens argue that this renewable energy target should be 30 per cent, it is huge increase from the 8 per cent target in place prior to the bill’s approval.

Upon the failure of Rudd’s CPRS scheme, Minister of Water and Climate Change, Penny Wong, vowed to bring the legislation up for a vote once more in three months time.

“I urge those opposite who have become supporters of renewable energy in recent times to join the bigger fight, the bigger fight against climate change, and I urge them to support when the government next presents the carbon pollution reduction scheme,” says Wong.

With the approval of the new renewable energy targets, Australia is guaranteed at least some legislation on hand in Copenhagen. However, the Rudd government faces an uphill battle in the months ahead to get their carbon trading scheme through.

With one failure already on its books, the carbon trading legislation will need re-tooling over the course of the next three months in order to stand a chance at success.

In its current form, the proposed legislation faced several opponents who will make the same claims in the next round of votes if their concerns are not appeased. These opponents included the Greens, Conservatives and independent senators who blocked the emissions trade scheme due to its impact on the economy, environment, and on jobs for Australians.

With so many groups to appease, can Rudd make the necessary adjustments in time to get his carbon trading legislation through parliament? The timing might be short, but the Opposition has already begun drafting amendments for the bill and Government continues to have talks with the coal industry.

It may be impossible to please every opponent, but hopefully by mid-November, some form of consensus will be reached on an emissions trading scheme for Australia, allowing Rudd to bring a solid example of Australia’s commitment to combat climate change with him to Copenhagen.

Wal-Mart President and CEO Mike Duke announcing the new Sustainability Index in July

Two weeks ago, the U.S. super-giant Wal-Mart announced plans to develop a worldwide sustainable product index that will record the ecological impact of every product the retailer carries. The sustainability of a product’s history will then be translated onto a label which the customer can see as they make their purchasing decisions. This sustainability index would be the first of its kind utilized at such a large scale and the retailer hopes that the index will become a new international retail standard.

“Customers want products that are more efficient, that last longer and perform better. And increasingly they want information about the entire lifecycle of a product so they can feel good about buying it. They want to know that the materials in the product are safe, that it was made well and that it was produced in a responsible way” says Mike Duke, Wal-Mart’s president and CEO.

Wal-Mart plans to roll out the initiative in three phases, starting with a survey of its more than 100,000 worldwide suppliers. This survey is composed of 15 questions (Wal-Mart questions (PDF)) and covers four areas: material efficiency; energy and climate; people and community; and natural resources. The survey includes questions about greenhouse gas emissions, the location of factories, water use and solid waste produced. Suppliers will use this survey in order to evaluate their own sustainability efforts, allowing for better transparency along its supply chain. U.S. suppliers are asked to complete the survey by October 1st and outside of the United States, timelines for suppliers will be created on a country-by-country basis.

In its second phase, Wal-Mart is helping develop a consortium of universities that will work together with retailers, suppliers, NGOs and governments to create a worldwide database of information about the lifecycle of products. So far, Arizona State University and the University of Arkansas have signed on to help administer the consortium and additional universities are in talks to join in, as well.

In its third and final phase, the consortium will develop an index which will translate the sustainability information of each product into a rating system that will allow customers to better understand the quality and history of the products that they are purchasing from its raw materials into the final product disposal. The format in which the information will be delivered to consumers is still under consideration but may come in the form of a color code, numeric score or other form of label.

So how does Wal-Mart’s announcement impact consumers who are not, as of yet, Wal-Mart customers?

Sustainability labels on products may lead to a shift in shopping habits similar to the effect of nutritional information provided on food products. Consumer surveys have shown for years that only a small segment of shoppers make their purchases based on values. However, many more shoppers would value shop if no additional effort was needed to gain such information and the prices remained comparable. As sustainability information for a product becomes readily available, suppliers will then have to alter their behavior in order to remain competitive with this segment of consumers or risk hurting their bottom line.

Furthermore, in an effort to broaden the number of participants and encourage universal transparency along its supply chain, Wal-Mart has implied that any of its suppliers who chooses not to take part in the new Sustainability Index initiative will become “less relevant” to the retailer. As the superstore pressures its 100,000 suppliers to adhere to the new standards, other discount retailers such as Big W, Target, and Kmart will likely follow suit.

While Wal-Mart is providing seed capital for the funding of the consortium, the database and index will neither be Wal-Mart created nor owned. This is important because the initiative can have greater global reach if it can be taken on as a new standard, requiring industry-wide collaboration and acceptance. According to Duke, “We can’t do this without partners. This cannot and should not be a Wal-Mart effort. It can’t be a U.S. effort. To succeed, the Index has to be global. It has to involve many stakeholders as vital partners.”

Unfortunately for those of us who are eager to see these labels on our products and, more importantly, see companies shift to more sustainable business practices, the new labeling system is not expected to be fully in place for another five years. And, the fact that Wal-Mart is a Goliath that almost breeds consumption and waste, the oxymoron of turning to Wal-Mart for the answer certainly won’t be lost on the more environmentally-minded consumer. However, despite the fact that there are no overnight miracles for making the market place more eco-friendly, it looks as though, with patience, the new Wal-Mart sustainability index has the potential to turn green into gold.

Al Gore, former U.S. Vice President and climate change campaigner, was in Melbourne on Monday for the launch of the new think tank Safe Climate Australia and to help train 300 people from 19 nations to address and encourage their leaders on the issue of climate change. Gore’s visit also coincides with Australia’s first ever Youth Climate Summit which hopes to mobilize a new generation of climate change activists. Speaking before a group of 1,000 Australian business leaders, Gore praised the Rudd government for pushing forward with emissions trading legislation ahead of the climate change conference held in Copenhagen this December.

Safe Climate Australia is a new environmental think tank composed of scientists, business and civic leaders and is modeled on a similar project in the United States called Repower America. The group demands that emergency action must be taken in order to address global warming and plans to help Australia move away from emissions-heavy coal towards a zero-carbon economy. Gore stated that the mounting environmental challenges in the world require immediate action.

According to the SCA organizer, Brendan Condon, the SCA hopes to develop a blueprint for the transition of all major sectors of the Australian economy to net zero carbon with a draft expected in 12 months.”This is a massive body of work that will include collating all relevant scientific research, developing systems architecture, scenario planning, emission reduction and sequestration strategies.”

While Gore praised the work of Rudd and the progress that the United States and Australia have made toward making climate change a higher priority, Gore mentioned that he would have written stronger emissions targets than currently proposed in Australia’s Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS) bill. “It’s not what I would have written, I would have written it as a stronger bill, but I’m realistic about what can be accomplished in the political system as it is,” Gore said.

Rudd’s proposed legislation has also been attacked by green groups who claim that the emissions targets are too weak. Currently, the emissions trading legislation commits to an emissions reduction target of 60% by 2050 and interim targets of between 5-25% by 2020. Rudd hopes to push the trading bill through parliament in August, four months ahead of the Copenhagen conference.

While Prime Minister Rudd’s legislation has come under fire, Gore still remains encouraged by the progress made by the Rudd government. “I am sincerely convinced that the right way forward is to get to the maximum that the political system will allow us to accomplish and begin the change, and then, as we gain experience with it, toughen it, strengthen it, make it better based on experience as business and industry learn how to adjust.”

Scientists warn that Australia can be vulnerable to damage caused by warming temperatures such as more severe storms and droughts as well as rising sea levels. Gore sited the record temperatures and brutal wildfires this past February in parts of Victoria that took the lives of 173 people as evidence that the planet has a “fever” brought on by climate change. “The odds have been shifted so heavily that fires that used to be manageable now threaten to spin out of control and wreak damages that are far beyond what was experienced in the past. This crisis is gaining momentum and the reason why is not that complicated.”

At the climate change talks in Copenhagen later this year, governments will meet in order to negotiate an international environmental agreement to succeed the Kyoto Protocol when it expires in 2012. While an agreement between leaders will be difficult, Gore remains optimistic. Gore stated before reporters, “One of the barriers in the Kyoto process was that the United States and Australia did not provide the kind of leadership necessary…Now with new leadership in both the United States and Australia our two countries are providing leadership. When that leadership is most needed is in the run up to Copenhagen, it can make a huge difference.” One of Rudd’s first acts as Australian Prime Minister was to sign Australia on to the Kyoto Protocol and both Australia and the United States have been active in the negotiation process leading up to Copenhagen in December.

Over the past two weeks, delegates from 183 countries convened in Bonn, Germany to create negotiating texts under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) for consideration in Copenhagen this December. In focus at Bonn was the enhancement of international climate change cooperation, particularly as it relates to the expiration of the Kyoto Protocol in 2012. In all, over 4,600 participants were in attendance, consisting of government delegates, intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations, representatives of the private sector, academia, and the media.

The Bonn Climate Change Talks, which began on June 1st and concluded on June 12th, consisted of four meetings as part of the UNFCCC: the sixth session of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention (AWG-LCA 6), the Ad Hoc Working Group on Further Commitments for Annex I Parties under the Protocol met for its eighth session (AWG-KP 8), and both the Convention’s Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI) and the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA) held their 30th sessions.

A brief summary of the meeting results are as follows:

AWG-LCA 6

The meeting by the AWG-LCA focused on the negotiating text development and was largely a success, resulting in a 200-page draft negotiating text. The draft managed to hold to elements addressed under the Bali Action Plan such as a shared vision for long-term cooperative action, adaptation, mitigation, finance as well as technology and capacity-building.

AWG-KP 8

The AWG-KP considered the various proposals put forth by the Annex I parties under the Kyoto Protocol. Unfortunately, these discussions resulted in less success than that of the AWG-LCA 6. Over the course of the plenary sessions, the parties were unable to reach an agreement on emission reduction targets post-2012 and developing countries expressed disappointment at the proposals made by Annex I countries. According to John Ashe, the Chair of AWG-KP, while options for the treatment of land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) to reduce emissions saw great progress, both aggregate emission reduction targets and individual targets have yet to be decided. In addition, the negotiating group remained far from the target range required by science to avoid the severe climate change impacts.

SBI

In focus for the SBI was the development and transfer of technologies. Three reports were produced by the Expert Group on Technology Transfer (including future financing options, long-term strategies, and indicators of performance). Furthermore, the SBI produced an agreement to reconstitute the Consultative Group of Experts on Non-Annex I National Communications. Unfortunately, the second comprehensive review of the capacity-building framework under the Protocol and the Convention was met with a lack of agreement.

SBSTA

The SBSTA considered such issues as the methodology, technology transfer, research and systemic observation, and reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries (referred to as REDD). The methodologies that make it possible to both monitor and report emissions from deforestation (accounting for 20% of greenhouse gas pollution) made solid progress. However, the SBSTA failed to come to an agreement on REDD for the COP draft.

Despite lack of agreement in various areas of discussion over the past two weeks, the meetings in Bonn resulted in the adoption of 31 conclusions and seven draft decisions. According to Yvo de Boer, the Executive Secretary of the UNFCCC, “A big achievement of this meeting is that governments have made it clearer what they want to see in the Copenhagen agreed outcome…In my view, an ambitious and effective agreed outcome in Copenhagen is in sight – an outcome that provides a strong and definitive answer to the alarm raised by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.”

The Bonn session marked the second in a series of five major UNFCCC meetings occurring this year in preparation for the UN Climate Change Conference, taking place from 7th-18th of December in Copenhagen. The next step in the process toward Copenhagen is for parties to refine the specifics of the text for discussion at the next Bonn meeting in August, followed by another session in Bangkok in late September and a gathering in Barcelona in early November.