1

Presentation by South Africa to AWG2

Initial views on ‘how to determine further emission limitation and reduction

commitments’

AD HOC WORKING GROUP ON FURTHER COMMITMENTS FOR ANNEX I PARTIES UNDER THE

KYOTO PROTOCOL In-session workshop at the second session

7 November 2006Nairobi, Kenya

2

Scenarios for stabilisation

• Annex I Parties asked to provide information about “scenarios for the stabilization of atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases and on the implications of these scenarios”.

• Recurring theme that annual emissions covered are a small share of global emissions

• Valid observation needs to be put into perspectivecomparing relative contributions in cumulative rather than annual emissions

• In historical terms and looking forward

3

Cumulative emissions matter

““The concentration of COThe concentration of CO22 in the in the

atmosphere is determined more by atmosphere is determined more by cumulative rather than by year-by-cumulative rather than by year-by-year emissions.”year emissions.”

IPCC IPCC Third Assessment Report (TS p. 61)Third Assessment Report (TS p. 61)

4

Annual Emission Data, 2002

Annual CO2 emissions of developing and

developed countries

- developed countries emitted 14 058 Mt CO2 (59%)

- developing countries emitted 9 606 Mt CO2

(41%)

nonAnnex I

41%Annex I

59%

Data source: Climate Analysis Indicators Tool (CAIT), WRI, Washington, DC, http://cait.wri.org

5

Cumulative Emission Data, 1900-2000

Data source: CAIT

Annex I77%

non-Annex I23%

Cumulative CO2 emissions

- developed countries emitted 741.3 Gt CO2

(77%) - developing countries emitted

220.6 Gt CO2 (23%)

6

Comparing annual emissions …

Annual emissions

-

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

2002

2004

2006

2008

2010

2012

2014

2016

2018

2020

2022

2024

2026

2028

2030

MtC

O2

fro

m f

oss

il fu

els

Annex I non-Annex I

Data source: IEA 2004World Energy Outlook

7

… to cumulative starting 1950

Cumulative, starting from 1950

-200,000400,000600,000800,000

1,000,0001,200,000

MtC

O2

fro

m fo

ssil

fuel

s

Annex I non-Annex IData source: IEA 2004 WEO; WRI CAIT

8

Article 3.9

• Has very clear focus – “Commitments for subsequent periods for Parties

included in Annex I” established by amendments to Annex B

• What are reasons why this is important?

• And what information might be needed?

9

Threats of serious or irreversible damages

• The reason why we are here

• If there were lack of ambition adverse impacts of climate change will affect all, but most particularly LDCs

• Millions of lives at risk in Africa

• Need more urgent action– conclude the work of the AWG by 2008

10

Secure carbon markets

• Carbon markets essential for cost-effective climate action

• Point Carbon 2006 report – estimated transactions – CDM 397 Mt CO2eq – EU ETS 362 Mt CO2eq – JI 28 Mt CO2eq

• How has CDM already assisted Annex B Parties in achieving their goals for 1st commitment period

• No gap to 2nd commitment period

11

Funding for adaptation

• CDM share of proceeds flows to Adaptation Fund

• 2% of 1.9 billion of CERs transacted = € 38 million

• More than contributions to the Special Climate Change Fund (as of April 2006)

• And yet still orders of magnitude smaller than what is required

12

How much do we need to know to take action?

• Precautionary approach should be applied to the AWG process

• Lack of full certainty on all issues not a reason for postponing urgent action

• Possible to draw on what we already know• Gather other information within the time-frame set by

decision 1/CMP.1• Without raising other issues that are not necessary to

come to a decision

13

Updating Annex B

• SA welcomes tabling of specific numbers by some Annex B Parties and regional economic integration organizations

• Would like to learn more about the information used to determine quantified emission reductions for subsequent periods

• Encourage other Parties included in Annex I to do the same, even where there may be uncertainty, provide specific numbers

14

Thank you