> Negotiations briefing by an insider (our own mole): “The US is arguing for 4 years ‘reflection’, and then restarting the negotiations. (Yet the IEA says we have to have emissions going down by 2017. Yech.) Our insider is depressed – says it feels like the whole negotiations are back where they were five years ago. The US is trying to trap China into being part of the Emission Trading Scheme, but everyone knows the US can’t deliver on their own involvement. China is willing, but doesn’t want to move ahead of the US. India is making mad demands, but will probably flip and agree if it gets to the last minute. Venezuela and Brazil are playing a blocking game but can be turned. Russia and Japan will go with the flow once everyone else has agreed. China might move their position and carry the rest; if everyone else agrees the US will probably cave, but probably still won’t get it through Congress. Not looking good.
> Green Climate Fund gossip: yes it will happen, pretty much as designed in Panama. A board will be selected with broad powers to design solutions. Climate Bonds is pushing for it to be mainly used a guarantee fund to bring in private capital for mitigation and adaptation projects. Looks like we will have 6 months to pitch solution ideas.
> I’m writing this in the best event location of the conference: inside the uShaka Seaworld aquarium, where the room is designed to look like the rusty insides of an old shipwreck. The speakers are lined up in front of a huge plate glass window, stingrays, sharks, schools of fish swimming behind them – most distracting. IRENA is launching a report on scaling up renewable energy in Africa. Good report… hang on, that stingray really is massive …
> Interesting disclosure by China Power & Light rep Jenny Ng, director of group environmental affairs. (CL&P is one of Hong Kong's duopoloy providers and, among other things, owns TruEnergy, one of Australia's energy generators - mainly coal). At a session on Climate Finance she spoke candidly about greening energy systems; she talked of the way the Hong Kong Government simply tells them what to do under their duopoly system, and they sit down and figure out how to do it, pass through costs, etc. She contrasted this with the chaotic political environment in Australia, where a carbon tax of $23 a tonne has just been introduced by the Gillard-led Government, is a real block to getting on with investment. Mind you she also said they fought the first scheme (the "CPRS", the axing of which helped topple the previous Rudd Government) very hard – contributing to the chaos, in hindsight. "In retrospect we probably made the wrong decision". Halleluijah. A real argument for the strong hand of the State.
> Walking through the big hall where all the organisation booths are crowded together, I come across a TV interview with Adam Gerrard, a lead author of a scientific report from FAO on global deforestation rates, based on global satellite date over time. Seems there’s no let up in the rate at which we’re cutting those trees down. Tropical forests in South America and Africa are now going fastest, although SE Asia is not far behind. Main driver: cutting forests for commercial agriculture – palm oil plantations, cattle ranches, soy farms.
> Traveling on a bus to the fish event today, I had an interesting conversation about renewables in small countries with someone from a UN development agency. We know that dozens of developing countries rely on diesel fuel generators for energy, that fuel prices are high, volatile and crippling for their economies, and that renewable energy is typically much cheaper. So you’d think they’d be shifting over quickly – but being cheaper is not everything. Problems range from lack of local capability to existing (diesel) suppliers having a “close” relationship with the relevant government decision-makers. Some countries spend more on diesel than al their exports earn. Does overseas aid end up making the difference?
