:strip_icc()/i.s3.glbimg.com/v1/AUTH_59edd422c0c84a879bd37670ae4f538a/internal_photos/bs/2018/Z/K/yIHisLSkywDpl5wtPv7w/ap18332696708379.jpg)
[ad_1]
Starting Sunday (2), the annual UN climate negotiations begin in Katowice, Poland. This year, COP 24 will have the main task of establishing the "regulation" of the Paris Agreement, ratified in 2015. That year, 195 countries pledged to limit global warming to 2 ° C here the end of the century.
The "regulation" should define how this objective should be specifically achieved. However, it is possible that this will not be decided this year either – just as it was not the case last year. The intention is that what was established in 2015 will come into force from 2020.
The task at hand is not easy.Although the agreement reached in 2015 provides for a maximum warming of 2 degrees Celsius, ideally, according to scientists from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC ), is that the Earth is not warming to more than 1.5 degrees Celsius by the end of the century. The publication of the IPCC report should also be one of the key issues of the twenty-ninth session of the Conference of the Parties.
In addition to the commitment to minimize soil warming, the Paris Agreement also recalled that rich countries should invest $ 100 billion a year. by 2020 to meet the needs of developing countries.
- According to Trump, it is "conceivable" that the United States returns to the Paris Agreement on Climate Change
Finally, all countries also pledged to send so-called "national contributions" Every five years – to contribute to the achievement of the objectives of the Agreement. Unlike the Kyoto Protocol, the Paris Agreement did not set targets for each country: each one of them decided what commitments to make.
For the experts heard by G1 the three main points to be discussed at COP 24 are:
- The " Rules Book " of the Agreement of Paris,
- How rich countries should help the poorest to adapt to climate change by investing 100 billion dollars a year by 2020. [19659012] IPCC Report 1.5, which stated that the efforts were to be
The purpose of the "Regulations" is to provide transparency on the manner in which the rules of the Paris Agreement will be applied. Delcio Rodrigues, director of the ClimaInfo Institute.
"It's basically about saying how each country will say that it has already fulfilled its commitment." Explain the transparency of the process, how others will believe what you say. these are national commitments, it is not easy to define a common rule that gives transparency and credibility, "said Rodrigues.
For Tbado Azevedo of the Climate Observatory, three main points must be defined in the "regulation":
- how countries will communicate the progress of individual commitments; ] and revise the objectives taken by each, which should be redone every five years and preferably increased.
- what should be done in the final report of all countries. This is why, according to Azevedo, there is a need to standardize how to report on progress – so that they can be compared.
The rulebook was to have been approved at last year's conference, but that did not happen. This is necessary because what was agreed in the Paris Agreement comes into force in 2020.
The experts heard by G1 believe that another major problem to debate is that of money: investing 100 billion dollars a year. By 2020, what developed countries must do to help developing countries cope with climate change.
"Poor countries need financial resources to deal with this problem, there is a big problem with money, it is worse, we are coming to a growing consensus on how to account for what has already been invested, but that has not yet been fully resolved, "Delcio Rodrigues said.
Countries disagree on the "type" of money to be taken into account to reach this goal of 100 billion per year: that only new investments are valid or that old ones also enter the account.
An IPCC report published in October of this year, to be presented at COP 24, revealed that the temperature of the planet should increase by no more than 1.5 ° C so that the negative effects are less intense. For Thelma Krug, Vice Chair of the IPCC, it is still possible to guarantee this goal, but drastic measures will be necessary.
"We have already warmed the planet to 1 ° C since the pre-industrial era.We expect this scientific knowledge that it is important to limit this heating to 1.5 ° C. If this does not occur we will have to use a technology that we do not currently have, and the consequences will be much greater than what you have today, "he says.
Among the adverse effects cited by scientists who participated in the preparation of the report, let us quote: famine, the destruction of the coastal and Arctic zones and the corals, for example. According to André Nahur, climate change coordinator for WWF in Brazil, the IPCC report should be one of the highlights of the twenty-fourth session of the Conference of the Parties.
"The various IPCC studies have, in particular, reinforced the fact that we have the opportunity to reduce our emissions.It would take about 12 years – by 2030 – for the Paris agreement to be concluded", he said. he declares.
Brazil's climate perspective will not be a priority for the new government after Brazil withdraws from next year's conference.
"We have received the news with concern, and receiving a COP indicates that this issue is a priority, so the Brazilian government has stepped back, showing that this issue will not be a priority for the national government. is not an environmental discussion, it's a development discussion, it would be a great opportunity that would be lost, "said Nahur.
The country does however have examples in several areas, Krug believes, as in the use of bioenergy. . "It's a sustainable production, considered less aggressive on carbon issues." Depending on how you use it, bioenergy will not necessarily mitigate climate change, and we can do it. "Brazil has evolved a lot to minimize the stalemate in energy production," he says.
Rodrigues, from the ClimaInfo Institute, does not see Brazil giving up so negatively.
"The host country has two obligations: that of logistics and that of chairing the COP.If you do not have an active country looking for solutions, who wants to solve the problem, this is not the case. Not good From the point of view of the agreement itself, as we have a lot of doubts about how the Bolsonaro government will be, it's better not to be here, "he said.
Former mining site of Katowice, former mining sector on October 12, 2018, The meeting will be held in Katowice, Poland, a country that produces 80% of the electricity produced from coal, according to a report from the ClimaInfo Institute. In addition, it is customary to burn coal to heat homes "Katowice itself hosts the largest trade show in the mining sector, says the Institute.
Rodrigues says the country's choice is bad. " It is not good that it is in Poland. It will be because they volunteered and there is a rotation between the continents. But the country is not one of the most proactive. "
For Andre Nahur, WWF Brazil, the willingness to host the event reflects the good will of the country
" Mostra ", he said," the country even new coal mines under construction. who, despite having this matrix, show that they are trying somehow. From commitment to practice, there is a big gap. We now have a lot of commitments around the table and we need concrete actions that do not happen at the speed that the world needs. "
Source link
