G77: EU funding “insignificant”

Lumumba Stanislaus Di-Aping, negotiator for 130 developing countries in the Group of 77, writes off the European Union as “providing no finance whatsoever”.
Marianne Bom - 12/12/2009 - Lumumba Stanislaus Di-Aping of Sudan – negotiator for the G-77 – is definitely not impressed by EU’s pledge to fund 7.2 billion euro over the next three years.

"I believe they are not only insignificant, they actually breed even more distrust on the intentions of European leaders on climate change," said Lumumba Stanislaus Di-Aping of Sudan on Friday, according to AFP.

"Our view is that European leaders are acting as if they were climate sceptics," he said. "Fundamentally, they are saying this problem does not exist and therefore they are providing no finance whatsoever."

The G-77 negotiator also criticized the EU proposal because it fails to address the issue of setting up long-term financing mechanisms. The EU estimates the need for funding to developing countries to be around 100 billion euro annually by 2020. The both public and private money from developed countries should be spent on adaptation to and mitigation of global warming in developing nations.

The Chinese Vice Foreign Minister He Yafei also worried about the long term funding:

"It will be relatively easy for developed countries to come up with a number for the short term for three years," he told AFP. "But what shall we do after three years?"

Tough bargaining still ahead at UN climate talks

After one week of UN-led climate negotiations in Copenhagen, some money is finally on the table and a draft agreement has been circulated. Now the really hard bargaining begins.
12/12/2009 - The draft proposal was sent around Friday to the 192-nation conference, although it set no firm figures on financing or cutting greenhouse gas emissions. And the negotiations on sharing the burden are likely to still go down to the wire and await the arrival of the world's leaders next week.

To top it off, the United States and China — the world's top two carbon polluters — even got into a battle of words.

"It's time to begin to focus on the big picture," said Yvo de Boer, the top UN climate official. "The serious discussion on finance and targets has begun."

A much-disputed 188-page text was whittled down to a mere seven pages of stark options on how much global warming is acceptable and how deeply nations must individually and collectively cut carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.

Options ranged from nearly eliminating global emissions to cutting them in half by 2050.

The document forced countries to abandon long-held posturing on secondary topics and focus on crunch issues. Starting Saturday, environment ministers will be able to go through the 46 points of text one by one, checking off some and leaving the toughest for the 110 heads of state and government arriving at the end of next week.

Many countries voiced reservations about the structure of the document or some of its clauses. "But that's all right. That's what negotiations are all about," de Boer said.

Todd Stern, the special US climate envoy, called the text "constructive" but singled out the section on helping poor countries lower their growth of carbon emissions as "unbalanced." He said the requirements on industrial countries were tougher than on developing nations and the section was not "a basis for negotiation."

Environmental groups welcomed the text as a step forward, although they lamented the absence of what they considered essential elements.

"It's a good pointer to a number of issues to be dealt with at the ministerial and even the head-of-state level over the next week," said Kim Carstensen of the environmental group WWF. "We're disappointed it does not include any clarity on what the legal outcome will be."

It said all countries together should reduce emissions by a range of 50 percent to 95 percent by 2050, and rich countries should cut emissions by 25 to 40 percent by 2020, in both cases using 1990 as the baseline year.

So far, industrial nations' pledges to cut emissions have amounted to far less than the minimum.

After years of being bogged down in detail, the draft highlighted the broad goals the world must achieve to avoid irreversible change in climate that scientists say could bring many species to extinction and cause upheavals in many parts of the Earth.

The draft agreement, drawn up by Michael Zammit Cutajar of Malta, said global emissions of greenhouse gases should peak "as soon as possible," while avoiding a target year.

It called for new funding in the next three years by wealthy countries to help poor nations adapt to a changing climate, but mentioned no figures. And it made no specific proposals on long-term help for developing countries.

The funding is perhaps the hardest part.

As the draft was circulated, European Union leaders announced in Brussels after two days of tough talks that they would commit 3.6 billion US dollars (2.4 billion euro) a year until 2012 to a short-term fund for poor countries. Most of this money came from Britain, France and Germany. Many cash-strapped former East bloc countries balked at donating but eventually all gave at least a token amount to preserve the 27-nation bloc's unity.

Still unknown is how much the wealthier nations, such as the US and Japan, will contribute.

Do UNFCCC