20.10 Apparently the US is about to have a press conference to have another go at China. They’d get further having a press conference to announce that they would raise their targets or the public finance  they plan to put on the table.

19.30 I’ve been away from our nerve centre at the Klimaforum, giving interviews to BBC Scotland and the Herald on the leaked fourth draft Accord. Still no numbers on the critical 2020 targets for rich countries. But language on equity and a two-track process including the Kyoto Protocol is back in. There is also still text on market mechanisms and REDD which would dilute the effectiveness of any deal. And of course this is only a political agreement, not a binding deal anyway.

There’s also a rather farcical commitment to examine whether the temperature target should come down to 1.5degC – to be considered in the review in 2016. It’s  farcical because any realistic chance of keeping under 1.5degC requires urgent action in the next five years, and closing loopholes, not creating more.

17.32 Apparently Heads of State have gone to dinner. NGOs have been making statements to an empty plenary hall – uniformly condemning the process and outcomes so far. The Accord has gone to a third or fourth draft. I’ll post more analysis when I have it.

17.25 The latest rumour is that the G77 is on the verge of a walkout, though given the quality of information available so far today they might have just gone home for the night.

17.00 The talks were originally due to end about now: but there is no deal on the table. Delegations and even heads of state have been asked to stay on for another day. Rumours of walkouts, suspensions and bilateral meetings between selected leaders abound.

We know there are further drafts of the Copenhagen Accord, and by all accounts it’s getting weaker by the hour, with text defending the Kyoto protocol removed or watered down, references to equity and the duties of rich countries to act first removed.

And in the background, some of the negotiations continue with the hope of COP decisions on specific topics such as REDD – the deal to pay poor countries to protect forests. But the current REDD texts also look worrying with poor safeguards, and an open door for linking into carbon markets, which would be bad for forests and bad for carbon markets, because the already low prices would fall further as a result of cheap forest credits becoming available to polluters in rich countries, allowing them to go on burning coal and oil.
I’ll do my best to keep this blog entry updated over the coming hours

Advertisements