This morning, the ADP co-chairs released a new, shorter draft of the negotiating text. The text is now five pages shorter than the previous version, as options have been condensed and streamlined across different issues. Much hard work on streamlining remains before the text is handed over to ministers, and another draft text is expected from the co-chairs tomorrow.
The new ADP text has outlined five streamlined options on the long-term goal. Some of the options provide hooks for even stronger language that is not currently on the table, like the call for 100 percent renewables. There has also been progress on measurement, reporting, and verification (MRV) of emissions reductions where options have been streamlined, as well as on adaptation.
On the ground in Paris, CAN members made the following comments:
“We are seeing progress on the long term goal. There’s more understanding that even 1.5 C warming is dangerous. And there are a clear set of options about how to translate the temperature goal into actual global emissions reductions. Some problematic expressions like net emissions are gone, so is the focus on 2100. None of the five options would as such be sufficient for us yet, but there are the hooks we need – on a 2050 timeline, and on achieving zero global greenhouse gas emissions – which can be combined and improved further, as we come to the next stage. We do still hope to see also the 100 percent renewable energy goal, advocated by 43 vulnerable countries, to be brought in as well.”
-Kaisa Kosonen, Greenpeace
“There are many parties who are saying that the current paradigm of differentiation has outlived its use and are asking to replace it with the concept of total symmetry. This is unfair, and it doesn’t acknowledge the many serious differences that remain between nations. Delegates could create an equitable new paradigm on differentiation, but that framework has yet to be constructed. The issue of differentiation links tightly to finance—especially the question of who provides finance in a post-2020 world. Finance would allow countries like India to quickly scale up their commitments and move fast towards renewable energy. For instance, India has pledged to install 300-350GW of renewables by 2030, but might be able do that by 2025 or 2020 if finance was provided. As a result of this accelerated development of renewables, their need to expand coal would drop.”
-Raman Mehta, Vasudha Foundation
“Climate finance is still a major sticking point in these negotiations, but we know where rich nations could find the cash. The G20 spends $452 billion each year subsidizing fossil fuels, but only spends $121 billion on renewables. The rich countries’ subsidies to fossil fuel producers are locking us into climate catastrophe, but they’re still turning out their pockets and saying that they’re broke when it comes to putting money on the table for the Paris deal. We can shift the hundreds of billions of dollars that countries are spending on fossil fuel subsidies to climate finance—that’s one way to ramp up finance and address the climate crisis.”
-Alex Doukas, Oil Change International
