Who is representing the US at COP23?

Posted on November 15, 2017 by yasin

You are on your way to COP23, the place to be for everything climate change. You walk through the doors and find yourself among hundreds of people from all over the world, running from one session to the other, with a quick stop perhaps for a cup of coffee. You attend negotiations and presentations, and develop an understanding of what is important to a country or a block of countries as they attempt to reverse the alarming rise in the planet’s temperature.

After a day or two, the chaos becomes normal and all the different languages you overhear start having a familiar tone. You begin to appreciate the setting: located by the Rhine and intersected by a city park, dotted with ponds where ducks, geese, and swans keep residence. It is beautiful. Then, as you are waiting for an electric car/bus to take you between the Bula and Bonn Zones, you notice a white dome shaped building to the side. Curious, you head there and find a sign for the U.S. Climate Action Center. Peppered throughout the place is the hash tag #wearestillin.

You feel surprised because the U.S. declared its intention to withdraw from the Paris Agreement. But a list of this Center’s events shows these presenters: Al Gore, Senator Ben Cardin of Maryland, Governor Jerry Brown of California, Governor Kate Brown of Oregon, and Governor Jay Inslee of Washington. In other words, a collection of American environmental rock stars and members of the U.S. Climate Alliance fill the place.

But then you notice that the U.S. delegation is hosting a “side event” titled The Role of Cleaner and More Efficient Fossil Fuels and Nuclear Power in Climate Mitigation. Unlike events held at the U.S. Climate Action Center, which attracted many attendees, this event drew protests. So who is representing the United States?

A closer look at the U.S. Climate Action Center shows that it as an effort by California Governor Jerry Brown that is funded by former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. It has attracted a collection of states, counties and municipalities; colleges and universities; businesses; non-profit organizations; faith organizations; and ordinary citizens. All told, the U.S. Climate Action Center spans all fifty states, 127 million Americans, and $6.2 trillion, all intent on honoring continued U.S. commitment to the Paris Agreement. A delegation called the People’s Delegation at COP23 pledged to the UNFCCC that “we are still in.”

The U.S. delegation, with representatives from the State Department and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), is the delegation of record. It, and only it, has the authority to negotiate on behalf of the U.S. (at least till the U.S. projected exit in 2020). But I believe the delegation that can effectuate the goals of the Paris Agreement has the upper hand. If “we are still in” manages to reduce GHG emissions in the U.S., then they are the delegation of record!

Africa on track to contribute to majority of global particulate matter

Posted on March 12, 2014 by tbach

A study co-authored by researchers from France and Cote d’Ivoire concludes that Africa will contribute as much as 55% of the world’s particle pollutants by 2030. In 2005, the continent accounted for 5% of sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions and 20% of organic carbon emissions. These particles come from petrol and diesel fuel combustion for transportation, and coal, fuel wood, charcoal, and animal waste incineration for heating and cooking. By 2100, Africa will represent 40% of the world population, with its urban population doubling from 2000 to 2030.

The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that more than two million people die every year from breathing in tiny particles in indoor and outdoor air pollution. These particles can cause asthma and allergies, respiratory and cardiovascular disease, and cancer.

What to do? The study recommends two strategies to fit the continent’s geography and development: Increased use of biofuels to decrease domestic emissions in west and east Africa, and decreased reliance on coal as a source of industrial and power plant emissions in southern Africa.

Germany, Exhibit A of the EU Emissions Debate

Posted on January 27, 2014 by tbach

Although Germany is popularly viewed as an international leader in the clean energy field, its 2013 performance in producing electricity tells a different story. Electricity output from brown coal plants rose .8% in 2013, to 162 billion kilowatt hours, according to the German Institute for Economic Research. This was the highest level since reunification, when Germany produced almost 171 billion kilowatt hours of power from coal, many in old eastern German plants. Consequently, Germany’s CO2 emissions will have risen in 2013, even though electricity from renewables is now 25% of the energy portfolio. (In 2014 alone, surcharges on electricity bills will generate €23.5 billion worth of subsidies for wind and solar power projects.)

This paradox is explained by two main reasons. First, the low price of CO2 emissions permits in the EU trading scheme has not produced sufficient incentives to switch sources. Second (and related to the first), new brown coal plants came on line in 2012 with a generating capacity more than twice that of the plants being shut down that year. Build it and they will use. In addition, electricity production from gas-fired plants fell by almost 15% (due in part to them being more expensive to run), resulting in coal plants mostly replacing the capacity lost when Germany shut down eight nuclear plants in 2011.

This increase in coal-generated power, and the larger context of higher priced gas-generated power, has led to Germany exporting more electricity than it imports. The Berlin-based think tank Agora Energiewende observed that German coal-fired plants “are crowding out gas plants not just in Germany but also abroad — especially in the Netherlands.”

Gerald Neubauer of Greenpeace declared that “the coal boom now endangers Germany’s credibility on climate protection and the energy revolution,” and requires the Social Democrats to adopt a more critical stance. This internal political debate will likely be felt in the upcoming EU elections as well. And in the EU’s position at future UNFCCC negotiations when offering nationally determined commitments.

Supporting Animal Empowerment through Climate Mitigation Projects

Posted on November 20, 2013 by afalberg

This afternoon I attended a side event entitled “Supporting Women Empowerment through Climate Mitigation Projects.” The event was put on by WOCAN – Women Organizing for Change in Agriculture & Natural Resource Management. The event, along with many of the Gender Day COP events, was about ensuring benefits to women and empowering them through projects that help combat climate change, such as REDD+ projects and substituting biogas stoves for the black-carbon spewing cook fires many rural women use.

The panel of speakers presented some great ideas about how to empower women in these rural areas. One such idea, presented by WOCAN and the South Pole Group, paired carbon credits from climate mitigation activities with projects that have a strong focus on gender. The idea is that demand for such projects will accelerate investments into the projects, which in turn will strengthen the delivery of gender benefits. An example of such a project was putting biogas stoves into the homes of these rural women; this would benefit them by giving them more quality time to spend (away from the cook fire) and would also decrease their carbon footprint. Empowers women and helps fight climate change.

Another speaker from Code REDD spoke about repackaging the selling of REDD projects to corporations. Forestry is not usually the highest priority for many corporations, but gender equality is; women are major buyers and users of many corporate products and are the “face” of some very big companies. Therefore, Code REDD has been trying to repackage REDD projects (which usually already benefit women) to sell the “gender factor.”

While sitting through this fascinating presentation, I was wracking my brain to figure out how I could connect what I did today at the CoP to wildlife and biodiversity. And then it hit me: such projects could be used to save species, too. Why not develop projects that both reduce carbon footprints while at the same time creating benefits for the wildlife in the area, like maintaining habitats. One incredible example can be seen here; this biologist, hoping to save orangutans from habitat destruction, rebuilt a rainforest in Borneo. A perfect example of a project that combines fight climate change with helping endangered species and wildlife. REDD projects already work with wildlife groups, such as the Wildlife Conservation Society (which happens to be the NGO I am working with), but I feel like this connection – the connection between saving our forests through creating REDD+ projects and conserving wildlife – could be stronger. Let’s empower our animals through these climate mitigation projects.