SPF SANTE PUBLIQUE, SECURITE DE LA CHAINE ALIMENTAIRE … · SPF SANTE PUBLIQUE, SECURITE DE LA CHAINE ALIMENTAIRE ET ENVIRONNEMENT 33 . Cancún Agreements - highlights UNFCCC process

SPF SANTE PUBLIQUE, SECURITE DE LA CHAINE ALIMENTAIRE ET ENVIRONNEMENT

1 Issues related to climate policies 24 November 2011 Conseil Central de l’Economie / Centrale Raad voor het Bedrijfsleven

Peter Wittoeck / Vincent van Steenberghe FPS Health, Food Chain Safety and Environment Climate Change Section


Outcome of COP.16/CMP.6:

The Cancún Agreements


3 3

Cancún Agreements - highlights

UNFCCC process back on track, after CPH “failure” Copenhagen “Accord” effectively enshrined in UN agreement Mitigation targets:

2 C objective Review 2013-2015, based on IPCC AR5 Anchoring of post CPH “pledges” into formal UN documents

(developed and developing!) …

Financial targets: FSF 30 G$ (2010-2012) 100 G$ (2020)


Cancún Agreements – highlights (ctd.)

“new principles” paradigm shift towards building a low-carbon society just transition of the workforce, decent work and quality jobs equitable access to sustainable development in all climate change-related actions fully respect human rights gender equality, effective participation women & indigenous peoples

establishment of processes for way forward: Scope and modalities of the Review Clarification of ‘pledges’ Guidelines and modalities for MRV, ICA, IAR Work programme on Loss & Damage REDD+ finance Consider market and non-market based mechanisms …


Cancún Agreements – highlights (ctd.)

Creation of new tools and institutions: Green Climate Fund Standing Committee for CC Finance NAMA registry Technology Mechanism (TEC & CTC/N) REDD+ Mechanism Adaptation Framework & Adaptation Committee


From Cancún to Durban


Durban: key challenges

1) Operationalising Cancún

2) Addressing ‘remnants’ from Cancún: international transport, carbon market mechanisms, LULUCF, AAU surplus, HFCs, …

3) Address main ‘political’ gaps in the regime: a) Mitigation gap b) Legal form gap c) Finance gap


2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Kyoto Protocol CP 1

Negotiate LBF ?

Comprehensive LBF?

Durban

Legal gap

Finance gap

FSF 30 G$ Path for scaling up climate finance? 100 G$/yr

Kyoto Protocol CP 2 ?

Cancún

Process to ramp up ambition?

Review Mitigation gap

Review ? 2 C

“pledges”

GAPs


2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Kyoto Protocol CP 1

Negotiate LBF ?

Comprehensive LBF?

Durban

Legal gap

Finance gap

FSF 30 G$ Path for scaling up climate finance? 100 G$/yr

Kyoto Protocol CP 2 ?

Cancún

Process to ramp up ambition?

Review Mitigation gap

Review ? 2 C

“pledges”

Mitigation gap


2 C trajectory

BAU : 56 Gt Low pledges: 53 Gt High pledges: 49 Gt

2 C : 44 Gt Now : 48 Gt

Source : UNEP gap report

Cancún: “work towards identifying a time frame for global peaking of greenhouse gas emissions […], and to consider it at COP17”

Cancún: “reducing global greenhouse gas emissions so as to hold the increase in global average temperature below 2 C above pre-industrial levels and that Parties should take urgent action to meet this long-term goal, consistent with science and on the basis of equity”

Cancún: “work towards identifying a global goal for substantially reducing global emissions by 2050, and to consider it at COP17”

Gap = 5-9 Gt


UNEP gap report


www.climateactiontracker.org



Cancún: “Agrees that developing country Parties will take nationally appropriate mitigation actions in the context of sustainable development, supported and enabled by technology, financing and capacity-building, aimed at achieving a deviation in emissions relative to business as usual emissions in 2020;”



Cancún: Urges developed country Parties to increase the ambition of their economy-wide emission reduction targets, with a view to reducing their aggregate anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol to a level consistent with that recommended by the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change;



-20 % -30 %


Low Carbon Roadmap Cancún: • […] a low-carbon development strategy is indispensable to

sustainable development.

• addressing climate change requires a paradigm shift towards building a low-carbon society that offers substantial opportunities and ensures continued high growth and sustainable development, […] , while ensuring a just transition of the workforce that creates decent work and quality jobs;

• Decides that developed countries should develop low-carbon development strategies or plans

• Encourages developing countries to develop low-carbon development strategies or plans in the context of sustainable development


Belgian position on EU LCE Roadmap

17


In general

The Roadmap is « very much welcome »

• Requirement to elaborate low emission developement strategies (LEDs)

• Urgent need to provide certainty to private sector and to public decision makers at all levels

• Need to reach long-term targets in cost-effective way (trajectory) by avoiding lock-in effects

• Important input for further development and strenghtening of EU climate policies

• Need to be open to EU domestic emission reductions above 80% in 2050 (scientific findings, e.g. from IPCC)

18


On specific policies

Energy efficiency is key • Many advantages: energy security, competitiveness, jobs, health, protection

against volatile energy prices, …

• Large investments are required but costs are to a large extent compensated by lower energy expenses and co-benefits

• Welcomes EC finding that 20% EE leads to 25% GHG reductions in 2020

The price-signal needs to be restored • EU ETS must play its role in driving low carbon investments

needs to be ‘recalibrated’

link with EE goal and policies

• Need to envisage implementation of new targets in non-ETS sectors (with cost-effectiveness between ETS and non-ETS sectors)

19


On the integration of policies

Policy initiatives • Energy and climate policies • Directive on taxation of energy products • Next Multi-annual Financial Framework • New product standards Other long term strategies • White paper on transport • Energy roadmap

20


On the « short » term (2020) (1/2) 21

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 20500%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Current policyPower Sector

Residential & Tertiary

Non CO2 Other Sectors

Industry

Transport

Non CO2 Agriculture

25% domestic reductions in 2020

Cost-effective trajectory


On the « short » term (2020) (2/2)

Issue related to « beyond 20% » or « step-up to 30% » GHG emission reductions since possible modalities to step-up to 30% are • 30% domestic reductions • 25% domestic reductions + 5% offsets Currently, no common BE position on this issue

Federal level: resolution of the parliament (kamer/chambre) in March 2011 • In favor of unconditional EU step-up to 30% • Attention to be paid to employment and competitiveness

22


Analyses: impacts and policies (1/4)

Macroeconomic impacts in 2020 (FPB analyses)

23

Average annual loss of 0.02%

Average annual loss of 0.05%


24 Analyses: impacts and policies (2/4)

• Energy bill

24

1200

1700

2100

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Baisse des importation énergétiques belges en 2020 (mio d'euros)

Source: BFP (2011)

20%

30% avec flexibilité

30% interne

• Public revenues from autionning of quotas

400

662,5

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Recettes annuelles belges des enchères ETS (moy. sur 2013-20, en mio d'euros)

Source: OKO Institute (2010)

20%



25 Analyses: impacts and policies (3/4)

• Employment opportunities

25

• Health

7120

25530

0

10000

20000

30000

Impact net sur l'emploi belge en 2020 d'un renforcement de l'objectif européen avec fiscalité carbone et recyclage en baisses

de cotisations sociales (en unités) Source: BFP (2011)


30% interne

297,5

621,5

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Bénéfices sur la santé en Belgique en 2020 d'un renforcement de l'objectif européen

(mio d'euros) Source: HEAL et al. (2010)


30% interne


Analyses: impacts and policies (4/4) Carbon leakage risks?

Before crisis • 20% scenario: C price ~ 30 € (2020) • Leakage addressed through free allocation After crisis • 20% scenario: C price ~ 16 € (2020) • 30% scenario: C price ~ 30 € (2020)

How to step-up? • Cost-efficient distribution of efforts at EU level: +14% in ETS sectors and

+6% in non-ETS sectors • ETS: at EU level (cap) / non-ETS: new targets at national level

26


Further steps needed

On the short/medium terms: • Further analyses on step-up to 30% (at MS and sectoral levels) • Start analyses on 2030 horizon and beyond (also DK PDCY priority)

On the long term: • Need to elaborate a BE LCE roadmap 2050 • Encouraged by Council of the EU • Focus on « transition » aspects • Involve all stakeholders and civil society • Such initiatives do exist abroad (eg: UK, DK, SE, SI, …) and even within

Belgium (eg: Limburg, Leuven)

27


28

[email protected] [email protected] www.climatechange.be

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.climatechange.be/

SPF SANTE PUBLIQUE, SECURITE DE LA CHAINE ALIMENTAIRE … · SPF SANTE PUBLIQUE, SECURITE DE LA CHAINE ALIMENTAIRE ET ENVIRONNEMENT 33 . Cancún Agreements - highlights UNFCCC process

Documents