Weathervane

Weathervane on Hiatus: Please Stay Tuned

RFF-WEB\Administrator — Fri, 28 Oct 2011 17:42:00 GMT

Weathervane is on hiatus. In the meantime, you can receive timely environmental and natural resource policy insights every week from RFF on the Issues. Additionally, the RFF Policy Commentary series continues its biweekly examinations of natural resource, energy, transportation, and land policy debates from RFF experts and thought leaders. If that’s not enough RFF for you, you can find up-to-the-minute information by liking RFF on Facebook and following us on Twitter.

Panama Climate Talks Signal What’s Ahead in Durban

Lynann Butkiewicz — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 14:13:00 GMT

The last major climate conference before UN Conference of the Parties 17 (COP17) begins next month wrapped up in Panama on Friday. Decisions and unresolved issues from the conference are indicators of what might be expected in Durban.

The main concern is the extension of the Kyoto Protocol. Australia and Norway have drafted a plan that would include all major emitters, excluding least-developed countries, leading to a legally binding deal in 2015. The plan includes:

(Image by: UN Climate Change)

· Standardizing targets at Durban, including 2020 emissions reduction targets.

· Formalizing and updating targets annually until 2015, ensuring transparency in emissions reductions.

· In 2012, updating targets and establishing rules for international verification.

· In 2013–2014, national reporting of emissions reductions.

· In 2015, a legally binding deal that includes developed country targets and actions by developing countries.

The European Union, seen as one of the only actors that could save the Kyoto Protocol, said that conditions for a second phase of the Protocol need to include all major emitters, such as the United States, China, and India.

“What’s the point of keeping something alive if you’re alone there? There must be more from the 89 percent,” EU Environment Commissioner Connie Hedegaard told Reuters.

Meanwhile, the United States (which did not ratify the Kyoto Protocol) remained firm in its stance that it will not sign an agreement unless all major economies are included in reductions.

"We do not see a meeting of the minds on these issues," U.S. Deputy Special Envoy for Climate Change Jonathan Pershing said. "We do not want to launch negotiations on an agreement we would not be able to join."

India, which backs the extension of the Kyoto Protocol as it stands, has long expressed concern over an agreement that requires legally binding commitments from developing countries, throwing a wrench into ideas for a new commitment period. (However, as I have said previously, this is probably only a negotiating tactic since India is reducing emissions domestically.)

Not all parties may be needed to move forward, however. UN Climate Chief Christiana Figueres said that the United Nations may be able to extend the Kyoto Protocol excluding those who refuse to sign it, such as Canada, Japan, and Russia. But even that vote will require an agreement from all countries attending the conference in Durban.

Still, there are some areas where Figueres said “good progress” is being made on the technical issues. The draft text for the confirmation of the Adaptation Committee has been teed up for completion in Durban. Details of where to host and how to conduct the selection process of the implementation arm of the Technology Executive Committee are also set to be finalized in Durban, leading the Technology Mechanism to become fully operational by 2012.

In regard to finance, fast-track finance for adaptation and mitigation in developing countries now has a clearer picture of committed funds and how they are being dispersed. Long-term financing—the commitments for 2020— has draft text that will also be ready for Durban.

Lynann Butkiewicz is Managing Editor of Weathervane.

Thursday’s Morning Reads

Lynann Butkiewicz — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 09:49:00 GMT

Australia’s lower house of parliament voted in favor of a national carbon tax, reports Reuters. The bill now heads to the upper house Senate for a vote in mid-November.

Next month, the Energy Information Administration will release a report outlining rules for clean energy standard legislation, according to The Hill.

Bloomberg reports that emissions permits in the European Union’s Emissions Trading Scheme are at a 30-month low. Carbon permits for December are now at €9.82 ($13.48) per metric ton.

According to a report by the Carbon Disclosure Project, several Canadian companies are incorporating climate policy considerations into their strategies before regulations are enacted, reports The Montreal Gazette.

The Cost of Climate Change in Canada

Lynann Butkiewicz — Tue, 11 Oct 2011 14:47:00 GMT

RFF experts have delved into domestic climate adaptation risks and recommendations in a comprehensive report, Reforming Institutions and Managing Extremes: U.S. Policy Approaches for Adapting to a Changing Climate. But what about our neighbors to the north?

According to Paying the Price: The Economic Impacts of Climate Change for Canada—a report by The National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy—damages from a changing climate could cost the Canadian economy C$21 billion ($20 billion) to C$43 billion ($42 billion) per year by 2050. These costs come from increased

(Image by: Robert Anthony Provost)

pests, fires, and flooding, as well as changes in temperature and air quality.

Meanwhile, the amount spent on climate adaptation and clean energy programs adds up to only a fraction of the expected damages. The Canadian federal government has spent C$85.9 million on climate adaptation programs and invested around C$100 million over two years in research and development of cleaner energy as part of Canada's Economic Action Plan.

The National Roundtable recommends adaptation efforts that are estimated to cost less than expected damages. Suggestions are similar to recommendations in the RFF report. For example, the Roundtable recommends restricting development in flood zones. RFF Fellow Carolyn Kousky has written extensively on flood risk management, recognizing that flood risk maps are often lacking and many homeowners don’t buy flood insurance. (For more, check out Kousky’s RFF Discussion Paper “Improving Flood Insurance and Flood-Risk Management: Insights from St. Louis, Missouri,” coauthored with Howard Kunreuther).

The Roundtable also recommends “strategic retreat” in flooding areas. In Resources magazine, RFF Nonresident Fellow James Sanchirico notes that abandonment may be politically challenging, but, if it “is not included as a feasible option, cost-effective adaptation policies will remain elusive.”

Furthermore, even though Canada is committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions 17 percent by 2020 from 2005 levels, it is still one of the leaders, along with Japan and Russia, in rejecting the extension of the Kyoto Protocol. But even as mitigation efforts are slow-going, Canada could step up its adaptation efforts to help avoid significant costs.

Lynann Butkiewicz is Managing Editor of Weathervane.

Tuesday’s Morning Reads

Lynann Butkiewicz — Tue, 11 Oct 2011 09:28:00 GMT

Australian Broadcasting Corporation reports on the carbon tax debate in Australia’s parliament.

UN Climate Chief Christiana Figueres said that companies may be valued incorrectly if climate change costs are not included, reports The Guardian. "As long as these companies [that emit large quantities of greenhouse gases] have a high value, we are giving out the wrong signals," said Figueres. "It has got to be that those companies that are investing in the technologies of the future are recognized."

The Bay Conservation and Development Commission is trying to limit construction on the San Francisco Bay waterfront to minimize the threat of damage caused by rising sea levels from climate change, reports NPR. However, the business community is fighting back.

The Financial Times examines carbon capture and storage (CCS) in Alberta, Canada, a key oil sands location, where the government is investing $2 billion on four large-scale CCS projects.

Friday’s Morning Reads

Lynann Butkiewicz — Fri, 07 Oct 2011 09:48:00 GMT

The New York Times answers questions about forests and climate change.

Senate Democrats are requesting a report on U.S. clean energy investment from Energy Secretary Steven Chu, reports The Hill. “As strong supporters of energy efficiency, renewable energy and advanced clean technologies, we write to you to request an update from the Department of Energy on our progress as a nation in clean technology deployment and American job creation in this sector,” the 22 senators wrote in a letter to Chu Wednesday.

Sky News Australia reports that Australia’s carbon tax may cost the economy $1 trillion.

Carbon capture and storage faces a hiccup in the United Kingdom as developer Iberdrola and the government are at odds about investment, reports Reuters.

In the midst of a financial crisis, Europeans still fear climate change more than financial turmoil, according to a new poll reported by The Guardian. "This is encouraging news,” said European Climate Commissioner Connie Hedegaard. “The survey shows that the citizens of Europe can see that economic challenges are not the only ones we face. A clear majority of Europeans expect their politicians and business leaders to address the serious climate challenge now."

Thursday’s Morning Reads

Lynann Butkiewicz — Thu, 06 Oct 2011 09:59:00 GMT

The European court of justice ruled today that airlines flying in EU airspace will be required to pay for their carbon emissions under the EU’s Emissions Trading Scheme, reports The Guardian. UK Climate Change Minister Greg Barker said, "We welcome today's legal opinion. The UK and EU will continue to robustly defend our policy to bring aviation into the EU's emissions trading system and believe it is consistent with international law. The aviation industry, in the same way as other industries, needs to play its part in reducing emissions."

AFP reports that some governments are exploring options for regulating carbon emissions from shipping.

Requiring oil refiners in the European Union to pay for carbon emissions from 2013 may result in refinery closures and relocations outside Europe, reports Reuters.

The U.S. Department of Defense's Dorothy Robyn said that the department could facilitate innovation in energy efficiency, according to The Atlantic.

Wednesday’s Morning Reads

Lynann Butkiewicz — Wed, 05 Oct 2011 09:49:00 GMT

The Huffington Post shares seven reasons why it’s necessary to fight for a global climate deal.

The battle continues between U.S. airlines and the European Union over a new rule that will tax airlines flying over EU airspace under the EU Emissions Trading Scheme. The Atlantic asks, who owns the skies?

China may have an ambitious climate policy plan, but Reuters reports that an expanding economy will still increase greenhouse gas emissions.

The New York Times looks into an alternative way to slow a changing climate: engineering the planet to lower the temperature.

Can Fossil Fuel Subsidies Transfer to International Climate Finance?

Lynann Butkiewicz — Tue, 04 Oct 2011 15:34:00 GMT

Last month, leaked World Bank documents (which will be presented to the G20 meeting of finance ministers in November) recommended that countries cut fossil fuel subsidies in order to boost funding to tackle climate change. I have discussed previously that securing public funding for climate finance will be difficult given fiscal constraints as governments tighten their budgets to deal with struggling economies. But are fossil fuel subsidies an issue on which governments can and, more importantly, are willing to act?

According to the report, Annex II countries contributed $40 billion to $60 billion a year from 2005 to 2010 in fossil fuel subsidies, and “if reforms resulted in 20 percent of the current level of support being

(Image via iStock)

redirected to public climate finance, this could yield $10 billion per year.”

President Obama has made the case to ditch $4 billion in fossil fuel subsidies to invest in clean technologies, reduce the deficit, and create jobs. (The total amount of subsidies the U.S. gives to oil companies is difficult to determine.) And RFF Nonresident Fellow Stephen Brown said in testimony before Congress that eliminating oil and gas company tax preferences would only affect oil prices by a few cents. While the United States may not have a national carbon market of its own, the report suggests that the financing could be targeted to support other markets.

"Governments could make innovative uses of climate finance to sustain momentum in the market while new initiatives are being developed. They could, for example, dedicate a fraction of their international climate finance pledges to procure carbon credits for testing and showcasing new approaches, such as country program concepts, new methodologies, CDM reforms and new mechanisms.

"This would be a cost-efficient use of climate finance as it would target least cost-options and would be performance-based. It would also help build up a supply pipeline for a future scaled-up market, preventing future supply shortages and price pressures."

Still, although devoting the bulk of the money that would otherwise be spent on fossil fuel subsidies to international climate finance might be among the priorities of international organizations, it may not top the list in individual countries. With an election approaching and with constant pressure from Congress to trim from the budget, the United States is more likely to use that money domestically, either toward clean energy technologies or, in the wake of the Solyndra debacle, simply to deficit reduction. Congress has already announced plans to reduce State Department and foreign aid funding.

The United States is not alone in its financial struggles—several European countries are facing default. Even though the European Union runs the largest carbon market and is the largest contributor of development assistance, continuing problems in the Eurozone could force countries to restrict international development spending, using whatever revenue is gained from eliminating fossil fuel subsidies to deal with domestic budgetary issues.

Lynann Butkiewicz is Managing Editor of Weathervane.

Tuesday’s Morning Reads

Lynann Butkiewicz — Tue, 04 Oct 2011 10:09:00 GMT

The Guardian looks into the killing of Honduran palm oil farmers on UN-accredited plantations and examines whether palm oil plantations should be included in the European Union’s Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS).

The European Commission may set a higher price on oil extracted from tar sands than conventional oil, according to The Wall Street Journal.

Antony Tyler, chief executive officer of the International Air Transport Association, told Bloomberg that if airlines try to pass the cost of the EU’s carbon tax on to consumers, they will most likely fail since the industry is competitive.

The Economist offers a chart comparing development in India and China, two emerging economies crucial to international climate talks.