12 Recommendations
Priorities
1. The
measurement, reporting and verification process is vital for progress
to be made on emissions reduction. Lack of transparency will delay
progress, or stop it altogether. There is widespread agreement
about the need for a single accounting regime for both developed
and developing countries. We recommend that DECC push for this
single accounting regime at an EU level and an international level.
(Paragraph 14)
2. At a time when
resources are limited money must be spent wisely and efficiently.
We recommend that the Government prioritise energy efficiency
as a mitigation strategy. EU cohesion funds or EU-ETS credits
should be used to facilitate the implementation of energy efficiency
policies throughout Europe. (Paragraph 18)
Forums
3. We
agree with DECC that "there is no other forum [than the UNFCCC]
that offers a better opportunity to secure agreement." We
recommend that the UK and the EU continue to use this process
to promote further global action to combat climate change. (Paragraph
29)
4. We recommend that
the Department should advocate moving HFCs into the Montreal Protocol.
(Paragraph 30)
5. The Minister noted
that "a global cap-and-trade system is what we all aim for".
We see considerable merit in the system that Sir David advocates,
but there are also enormous challenges that may make it impracticable.
(Paragraph 37)
6. We recommend that
DECC cooperates with industrial sectors and other interested stakeholders
to identify the obstacles to and benefits of a sectoral trading
scheme with a view to including it in an international agreement.
(Paragraph 39)
Kyoto Protocol
7. We
recommend that the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol
lasts for eight years until 2020. In addition it must have a review
clause in case the IPCC report recommends that the target for
the global average temperature increase be cut from 2 °C
to 1.5 °C. (Paragraph 42)
8. It is highly improbable
that countries such as Canada, Russia and Japan will sign up to
the second Kyoto period. Many of them have publically stated they
will not. Instead diplomatic efforts should now be focused on
the more promising Durban Platform. (Paragraph 47)
9. We urge caution
against the Government's commitment to adopt strict rules around
surplus assigned amount units (AAUs) of CO2 and recommend that
it the government does not confuse its two aims of agreeing a
second commitment period under the Kyoto Protocol and its desire
to ensure the maximum net reduction of emissions from the current
scenario. To do so will only raise serious questions of equity
that may prejudice negotiations. (Paragraph 50)
2 °C Target and Current
Ambition
10. Europe's
influence over, and potential leadership of, future international
negotiations would be greatly increased if its own economy was
decarbonised more rapidly. It should therefore set a target of
a 30% reduction on 1990 levels by 2020. This would be a win in
the long term economic and environmental interests of the UK and
the EU. We recommend that the Government argues strongly for this
at the European level. (Paragraph 54)
11. We recommend that
DECC support the use of the Human Development Index or a similar
"objective number" to determine equitably which countries
are treated as developed nations. (Paragraph 65)
Finance
12. We
recommend that the United Kingdom exploit its expertise in financial
services to develop innovative mechanisms for levering in more
private investment to help achieve the US$100 billion target to
make up for the almost inevitable shortfall in public funds. (Paragraph
71)
13. We applaud DECC
for pledging up to 50% of its climate fund on adaptation and recommend
this is maintained. (Paragraph 74)
14. We note that witnesses
have argued that the revenues from EU ETS should be allocated
for climate finance and we recommend that the Government consider
matching these revenues by an increase in the budget for the UK's
International Climate Fund. (Paragraph 77)
15. In his evidence
the Minister said that DECC are not in favour of "a complicated
institutional architecture". He added that "there is
scope within the UNFCCC framework to have a more streamlined approach."
We recommend that DECC clarify how the international finance
architecture could be streamlined. (Paragraph 81)
REDD+
16. We
recommend that DECC investigate why the disbursement of funds
into REDD+ projects has been so disappointing. We recommend that
the Government support work to resolve such legislative anomalies
that hamper the deployment of finance at scale to tackle deforestation.
The Department should clarify what steps are being taken to prepare
for the REDD+ finance workshop at COP 18. (Paragraph 86)
17. Reference levels
are intended to be used by countries as the common baseline against
which to compare, for example, how much they can avoid emissions
by undertaking a specific set of management activities. These
reference levels are used in the MRV system. Parties in Durban
agreed to a set of technical guidelines for ensuring that reference
levels had environmental integrity. Decisions to be made at Doha
will include how to measure and monitor emissions due to forestry
within these technical guidelines. In their evidence DECC asserted
that they will push for biennial reporting to start in 2014. The
Committee supports this aim and recommends the Government negotiate
strongly to this end. (Paragraph 87)
18. We recognise the
importance of REDD+ in tackling emissions from forestry, particularly
with regard to developing countries where the forest areas are
not under the control of the central government. We recommend
that the UK and the EU press for stronger and more detailed social,
governance and environmental safeguards for REDD+ projects. (Paragraph
90)
Carbon taxes and embedded carbon
19. We
welcome the Department's acknowledgement of our concerns as outlined
in our Consumption Based Emissions Reporting inquiry and their
plan to increase the prominence of consumption-based emissions
alongside territorial emissions in their literature. However,
this does not address the emissions due to embedded carbon, or
go far enough towards tackling global emissions. As our report
highlighted, we recognise the enormous difficulty of achieving
a legally binding agreement on emissions reductions based on consumption
rather than territorial emissions, not least because all international
negotiations hitherto have been based on the latter. We are therefore
not proposing that consumption based emissions should immediately
be introduced into the international process. However we urge
the Government to show leadership and acknowledge that consumption
in the UK and some other developed countries is driving up territorial
emissions elsewhere . This acknowledgement would encourage a more
equitable approach to reducing emissions globally. (Paragraph
95)
Fossil Fuel Subsidies
20. We
accept that in some countries fossil fuel subsidies help to alleviate
fuel poverty. However these subsidies are not confined to countries
where that is the case so we recommend that the Government strongly
support pro-poor interventions that would raise the standard of
living for the poorest whilst enabling fossil fuel subsidies to
be eliminated, particularly in developed countries. (Paragraph
99)
|