Sun, 17:46 14 Jun 2009 GMT17

 
Climate change cash key to unlocking progress on global deal
09 Jun 2009 10:52:00 GMT
Written by: Megan Rowling
Greenpeace activists bar the entrance to EU headquarters in Brussels, March 2009, urging finance ministers inside to bail out the planet and devote billions of euros to help poor nations tackle climate change.<br>
REUTERS/Yves Herman
Greenpeace activists bar the entrance to EU headquarters in Brussels, March 2009, urging finance ministers inside to bail out the planet and devote billions of euros to help poor nations tackle climate change.
REUTERS/Yves Herman

As negotiators in Bonn plod through the first draft texts about a new U.N. climate treaty, due to be agreed in Copenhagen in December, the real attention is on European Union finance ministers meeting in Luxembourg on Tuesday.

They will discuss proposals on international financing for climate change measures, including a report that says poor countries will need about 100 billion euros ($142 billion) a year by 2020 to help them cut emissions. The leaked document also says climate change adaptation costs in all developing countries could reach 23-54 billion euros per year in 2030.

The finance ministers will make recommendations for discussion at a European Council meeting on June 18 and 19.

While the numbers in the draft report aren't so far from the amounts developing countries and aid groups say are needed for poor countries to tackle climate change, some campaigners are sceptical the EU is ready to put any concrete pledges of money on the table.

ActionAid warns that the bloc's member states have so far been unable to reach agreement on supporting any of the international financing proposals being floated, and Tuesday's meeting of finance ministers is unlikely to change that.

The agency argues that, if disaster is to be avoided in Copenhagen, Europe must provide its fair share of the finance and find innovative ways of doing so.

"(This funding) is not going to fall out of the sky - it will require a combination of automatic mechanisms, including global carbon taxes, to raise the money," said Tom Sharman, ActionAid's head of climate change.

A blueprint issued on the sidelines of the Bonn talks on Monday, written by almost 50 leading environmentalists and backed by groups including WWF, Greenpeace and Germanwatch, called on industrialised countries to raise at least $160 billion a year from 2013-2017, mainly via auctioning of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions allowances, to help developing nations cope with climate change.

Oxfam's EU climate policy adviser, Tim Gore, says the EU must stick its neck out and show leadership on financing. "What the EU does has massive implications for (the U.N.) negotiations," he told AlertNet. "It needs to get out of this 'you first' approach."

SHOW AND TELL

Climate campaigners are tired of what they see as reluctance on the part of rich countries to make promises on funding and targets to cut emissions before others reveal what they are prepared to do - including mitigation efforts by developing countries. Poorer nations, meanwhile, want to know how much money rich governments will stump up before they agree to cut their own emissions.

"This starts to raise questions about where we're heading for Copenhagen," said David Waskow, Oxfam America's climate change programme director. "Countries are going to have to leap and they're all going to have to leap together."

Some campaigners are pinning their hopes on July's Group of Eight summit in Italy. Non-governmental organisations working on climate issues are considering issuing a call for the world's richest governments to provide the $2 billion needed by the world's poorest governments for urgent actions they have identified to cope with the effects of global warming.

"That would be a great first step, even though it's a drop in the ocean," said Gore. "It would show that developed countries are going to live up to their commitments."

Saleemul Huq, head of climate change at the International Institute for Environment and Development, says there are rumours G8 leaders are planning to make an announcement on climate change financing, including for adaptation.

"The finance needs to be put in; it has to come early in the negotiating process," he said. "Finance is the glue that will hold everything together."

Huq says the Bonn talks are taking place in a positive atmosphere, but can't be expected to produce more than a text that will form the basis for concrete negotiations in the coming months. "Things are moving in the right direction, but not fast enough and far enough," he said.

For Huq, the key to pushing the process forward lies with wealthy nations' finance ministers - who aren't in Bonn - as it's they who will decide how much money climate negotiators can offer. Without this, the draft text will stay blank on the amount of funding poor countries can expect to receive.

"They would like many tens of billions, but they would probably be satisfied with a few tens (of billions)," Huq said.

If governments are serious about reaching a new global deal to tackle climate change by the end of the year, it seems they'd better start putting their money where their mouths are.

Reuters AlertNet is not responsible for the content of external websites.

Del.icio.us Del.icio.us  |   Digg Digg  |   NewsVine NewsVine  |   Reddit Reddit   
We welcome argument but AlertNet will not publish comments that are racist, abusive or libellous.

3 responses to “Climate change cash key to unlocking progress on global deal”

Please note that comments should not be regarded as the views of Reuters.
  1. Rob Shaw says:

    You idiots who voted for Os[b]ama deserve what you get. Tax the crap out of the people in "developed" countries and five the $$$ to the turd [sic] world. Then, all will be well.

    Rob

  2. Russ says:

    On the NOAA website they still only have hard data from 1961 - 1990. The rest of the data from 1991 to 2009 is modeled. Why is this? Why are they intent on changing world wide developement policies without giving us the proper data. This seems like a grand scheme to control the masses while the elite politicians exempt themselves from the laws they pass for us to live by. They do it with diplomatic immunity, upgraded healthcare, and soon they will be the only ones allowed to travel because the carbon fees will be so expensive for the masses, we will not be able to afford it. But the elite politicians will surely exempt themselves and their militaries.

  3. Bernadette D C says:

    Global warming requires the most urgent action to avert disaster, meaning, of course the speedy transfer of money to get to work. And it begs the question: Why not just stop producing the offending chemical altogether and ban everything related until we dodge the bullet? I say it's because it's like smoking cigarrettes. The box says right on it that it's likely to kill you, and I have nothing but respect for a company that deals with the issue so honestly. But fools want to take the credit for getting the warning on the pack, yet we've known it in our hearts since early childhood, when mom told us not to be stupid by lighting one up because it will harm you, which is the same thing enviromentalists and their self-serving diatribe do about saving one thing or the other at the expense of common sense and whatever product happens to be the offending flavor of the year. Why not just BAN tobbacco if it's so bad for you, or petroleum ! and pesticides? Because the real purpose of the outcry is not to save us from ourselves, but rather to aleve the guilt that comes with being the leader in world developement,a guilt,by the way,only felt by the Godless.So, by forcing the fortunate recepients of such blessings to clean up at a crippling cost a mees so big that cannot be seen in actual time,and taxing smokes out of reach of the precious poor, we are told to trust in the opinions of trained scientists and other people with fears to impart. I, for one, if I was CONVINCED something is happening to earth, and I had the power to implement measures to curve the threat( BY relying on my stable of experts, of course) And if the offending chemical was, say, beans, I'd institute a ban on beans and wait a year and test the air and see if things came back to normal. But no. What happens in real life is the opposite. The product is declared a poison, to big, televised fanfare, where we are told by the well-scrubbed activi! st that the threat will be confronted, and a tax of 50% on sod! i pop should show they really mean business. But in my heart i've always sort of known that too much cola is probably not that good for me. Don't fall for man made global warming. ( that's right,I didn't use the new approved and improved "Climate Change" moniker)

Leave a Reply

Enter the code shown on the left *

When you submit a comment to us we request your name, e-mail address and optionally a link to a website. Please note where you submit a website address, we may link to it via your name. By sending us a comment, you accept that we have the right to show the comment and your name to users. Although we require your email address, this will not be published on the site, and is only required to enable us to check facts with you, e.g. if you are making a claim we can not confirm easily. Additionally, if you would like your comment removed at anytime, you'll have to use this e-mail address when you contact us. To remove a comment at any time please e-mail us at blogs-(at)-reuters-(dot)-com (address obscured to avoid spam) specifying who you are and what you would like removed. We moderate all comments and will publish everything that advances the post directly or with relevant tangential information. We reserve the right to edit comments in order to maintain the quality of the comments, and may not include links to irrelevant material. We try not to publish comments that we think are offensive or appear to pass you off as another person, and we will be conservative if comments may be considered libelous. Reuters will use your data in accordance with Reuters privacy policy. Reuters Group is primarily responsible for managing your data. As Reuters is a global company your data will be transferred and available internationally, including in countries which do not have privacy laws but Reuters seeks to comply with its privacy policy.

Unlike some other content on this website, the written content in this article may be republished or redistributed by any means free of charge. Any use of photographs and graphics on this website is expressly prohibited. You must check whether written content contained in other articles on this website may be republished or redistributed without the express permission of Reuters or the relevant third party provider.

Before joining AlertNet, Megan Rowling worked as a freelance print and television journalist in Britain, France and Japan. At AlertNet, she specialises in the humanitarian impact of climate change. In 2008, she also spent several months working part-time as a media relations officer for the British Red Cross. She has an MSc in development management.

Latest bloggers




URL: http://www.alertnet.org/db/blogs/20316/2009/05/9-105214-1.htm

For our full disclaimer and copyright information please visit http://www.alertnet.org