Well here we are again, several thousand people gathering in a conference centre to talk about climate change and, supposedly, work towards a deal to actually do something about it. There are good guys and bad guys: campaigners say a deal is possible while journalists sound pessimistic. We’ve been here before, right? Yes, but Durban really is important and maybe, just maybe, this time it’s a little bit different.
I’m in the South African city (which incidentally is not bathed in sunshine, it’s the rainy season) together with our chief policy adviser Ruth Davis as part of an international Greenpeace team. These meetings come around every year, and every time we campaigners say they are of huge importance, it’s the last chance etc etc. Why should we care what happens in Durban?
This two-week meeting matters, it really does, because after the shock of Copenhagen this is the point at which we need to get this process back on track. That means getting the world working towards a deal that will actually beat climate change instead of just talking about it. We can’t conclude the deal the world needs here, but Durban is about putting in place the building blocks that will deliver that deal in the next few years (and for a bunch of reasons, it really needs to be struck in 2015).
So who’s meeting here?
The
194 countries which are signatories to the UN Framework Convention on Climate
Change. That means everyone from the world’s biggest emitters (China and the US) to the small island states
facing eradication as sea levels rise. This forum is the only
place where the countries responsible for climate change are forced to sit
across the table from the representatives of countries already living with the
direst consequences.
It’s already obvious to me that the proud history of South Africa’s social justice movement is going to be keenly felt on the streets of Durban and inside the conference centre. In fact, this meeting feels different precisely because it’s in Africa. After all, climate change is a huge threat to this continent and the outrage is more pronounced because Africans aren’t responsible. You can really feel that here.
How will we know if Durban is a success or
not?
Well,
there are three critical issues that will be decided.
Number one: in the next two weeks, the countries need to agree that they’ll sign a legally binding treaty by 2015. That means a global treaty with mandatory emissions cuts.
Number two,:that treaty needs to be truly ambitious, one that will see global emissions peak within five years and then rapidly decline.
Number three: the Green Climate Fund - the pot of cash established to help developing countries reduce their emissions and adapt to climate change - needs to be finally set up with real money found to finance it.
What about the Kyoto Protocol? Doesn’t
it expire next year?
Not
quite. The current commitment period, which sets legally binding emissions
reduction targets, ends in 2012. So we need a second commitment period - in
other words, new targets from 2013 onwards.
Keeping Kyoto going is vital because it’s the foundation of any comprehensive treaty. It took years to negotiate and is, in essence, the rulebook for the global fight against climate change. It links targets to the science and makes countries accountable. If we throw it out, we’re going back to square one. Countries that want to kill Kyoto are really asking for a terminal delay in action.
Where does the UK government
stand on all this?
Ministers
have been making some positive statements, saying they want to safeguard Kyoto. And they’ve
consistently told vulnerable countries that they’ll not join the big
polluters who’d
be happy to see the negotiations limp on for another decade with some minor
victories on process but no attempt to achieve a real breakthrough that would
actually radically reduce emissions. Some big countries want the next decade to
be about cementing the weak voluntary deal agreed at the fag end of Copenhagen, and those nations are the US and some of the emerging
economies.
They will be putting the UK and its EU allies under intense pressure to stop trying to get anything more ambitious out of this conference. We want to see our government stand up for a real deal and not give into pressure from governments that have turned foot-dragging into an art form.
So, doom and gloom or the sunny
uplands of a new dawn?
Er,
neither? Can I say neither?
Transforming the way the world generates its energy is a far from a trivial matter, and it's no easier to do that in a year than it would be to take a screaming toddler and turn him or her into a polite responsible young adult overnight. This is going to take years but unless we start going in the right direction here in Durban, then we may not make not it.
But if this year we can get countries to agree that by 2015 they’ll sign a legally binding treaty - an ambitious one with the necessary cuts - and if we can agree here that the money will be made available to help poor countries play their part, then we’ll have rescued this process from the chaos and meltdown of the last night of Copenhagen.
If we can do that then millions of people on this continent and across the world will face a better future.
