Presentation by South Africa to AWG2
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 14

AD HOC WORKING GROUP ON FURTHER COMMITMENTS FOR ANNEX I PARTIES UNDER THE KYOTO PROTOCOL PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 81 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Presentation by South Africa to AWG2 Initial views on ‘how to determine further emission limitation and reduction commitments’. AD HOC WORKING GROUP ON FURTHER COMMITMENTS FOR ANNEX I PARTIES UNDER THE KYOTO PROTOCOL In-session workshop at the second session 7 November 2006 Nairobi, Kenya.

Download Presentation

AD HOC WORKING GROUP ON FURTHER COMMITMENTS FOR ANNEX I PARTIES UNDER THE KYOTO PROTOCOL

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Ad hoc working group on further commitments for annex i parties under the kyoto protocol

Presentation by South Africa to AWG2Initial views on ‘how to determine further emission limitation and reduction commitments’

AD HOC WORKING GROUP ON FURTHER COMMITMENTS FOR ANNEX I PARTIES UNDER THE KYOTO PROTOCOL

In-session workshop at the second session

7 November 2006

Nairobi, Kenya


Scenarios for stabilisation

Scenarios for stabilisation

  • Annex I Parties asked to provide information about “scenarios for the stabilization of atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases and on the implications of these scenarios”.

  • Recurring theme that annual emissions covered are a small share of global emissions

  • Valid observation needs to be put into perspectivecomparing relative contributions in cumulative rather than annual emissions

  • In historical terms and looking forward


Cumulative emissions matter

Cumulative emissions matter

“The concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is determined more by cumulative rather than by year-by-year emissions.”

IPCC

Third Assessment Report (TS p. 61)


Annual emission data 2002

Annual Emission Data, 2002

Annual CO2 emissions of developing and developed countries

- developed countries emitted 14 058 Mt CO2 (59%)

- developing countries emitted 9 606 Mt CO2 (41%)

Data source: Climate Analysis Indicators Tool (CAIT), WRI, Washington, DC, http://cait.wri.org


Cumulative emission data 1900 2000

Cumulative Emission Data, 1900-2000

Cumulative CO2 emissions

- developed countries emitted 741.3 Gt CO2 (77%)

- developing countries emitted 220.6 Gt CO2 (23%)

Data source: CAIT


Comparing annual emissions

Comparing annual emissions …


To cumulative starting 1950

… to cumulative starting 1950


Article 3 9

Article 3.9

  • Has very clear focus

    • “Commitments for subsequent periods for Parties included in Annex I” established by amendments to Annex B

  • What are reasons why this is important?

  • And what information might be needed?


Threats of serious or irreversible damages

Threats of serious or irreversible damages

  • The reason why we are here

  • If there were lack of ambition  adverse impacts of climate change will affect all, but most particularly LDCs

  • Millions of lives at risk in Africa

  • Need more urgent action

    • conclude the work of the AWG by 2008


Secure carbon markets

Secure carbon markets

  • Carbon markets essential for cost-effective climate action

  • Point Carbon 2006 report – estimated transactions

    • CDM 397 Mt CO2eq

    • EU ETS 362 Mt CO2eq

    • JI 28 Mt CO2eq

  • How has CDM already assisted Annex B Parties in achieving their goals for 1st commitment period

  • No gap to 2nd commitment period


Funding for adaptation

Funding for adaptation

  • CDM share of proceeds flows to Adaptation Fund

  • 2% of 1.9 billion of CERs transacted = € 38 million

  • More than contributions to the Special Climate Change Fund (as of April 2006)

  • And yet still orders of magnitude smaller than what is required


How much do we need to know to take action

How much do we need to know to take action?

  • Precautionary approach should be applied to the AWG process

  • Lack of full certainty on all issues not a reason for postponing urgent action

  • Possible to draw on what we already know

  • Gather other information within the time-frame set by decision 1/CMP.1

  • Without raising other issues that are not necessary to come to a decision


Updating annex b

Updating Annex B

  • SA welcomes tabling of specific numbers by some Annex B Parties and regional economic integration organizations

  • Would like to learn more about the information used to determine quantified emission reductions for subsequent periods

  • Encourage other Parties included in Annex I to do the same, even where there may be uncertainty, provide specific numbers


Thank you

Thank you


  • Login