Rich countries accused of carbon 'cheating'
by Richard Black
Some rich countries are seeking new rules under the UN climate
convention that campaigners say would allow them to gain credit for
"business as usual".
Russia, Australia, Canada and some EU countries are among the
accused.
The rules relate to land-use change, which can either release or
absorb carbon, depending mainly on whether forests are planted or
chopped down.
Rich countries, apart from the US, could account for about 5% of
their annual emissions through this loophole.
The US is not involved in these negotiations because the proposals
fall under the Kyoto Protocol, of which it - alone among developed
countries - is not a part.
By way of comparison, 5% is roughly equal to the total emissions
reduction that developed countries pledged to make between 1990 and 2012
under the Kyoto Protocol.
The benefit for some countries, notably Russia, would be much
greater.
"This would allow developed countries to circumvent their obligations
on reducing emissions," said Melanie Coath, climate change policy office
with the UK's Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB), who has
conducted analytical work on the draft text currently being negotiated.
"These are double standards that make us question the legitimacy of
the whole process," added Kevin Conrad, lead negotiator for Papua New
Guinea and chairman of the Coalition for Rainforest Nations.
"If rich states tell us we have to adopt robust standards (for REDD)
and then use forestry as their biggest get-out clause - it's double
standards, it's climate fraud."
Diplomats from developing countries have also criticised the
proposals, which are under discussion during a fortnight of talks in
Bonn under the UN climate convention (UNFCCC).
Some have suggested that rich countries would operate their forestry
sectors under looser accounting rules than developing nations would face
under the REDD mechanism (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and
forest Degradation).
'Fudge' packet
Several different "fudges" are up for discussion in the draft text
that would create the 5% (or 500 megatonnes of CO2) loophole.
Continue reading the main story Certainly from the EU side, what we
want to see is a system where we have the highest environmental
integrity that is possible Artur Runge-Metzger.
EU chief negotiator One would allow countries to measure emission
reductions or increases against a "forward-looking baseline".
In other words, a country would decide how its land-use carbon
emission or absorption would be likely to change in future, and then to
measure actual performance against that baseline.
By contrast, developed nations have to measure emissions from every
other sector of their economies simply for what they are - against a
zero baseline.
- A second proposal, from Russia, would mean that countries would not
have to count emissions from land-use change until land-use changes
across the entire country resulted in net emissions.
Currently, Russia's land-use sector is a big net absorber.
In addition, each governments could decide which aspects of land use
change to include in its emission reports - which it would then compile
and submit to the UN.
Delegates from some EU countries have suggested that others with
large areas of forest - such as Austria, Finland and Sweden - are
pushing for lax regulation, along with Russia and Australia.
But the European Commission's chief negotiator, Artur Runge-Metzger,
said the EU favoured tighter rules.
"Certainly from the EU side, what we want to see is a system where we
have the highest environmental integrity that is possible," he told BBC
News.
- BBC |