Will Emissions Loophole be Finalized at June Climate Talks?

The up-coming UN climate talks in Bonn this June could determine whether the World is prepared to allow developed countries increase forestry emissions as part of a global climate deal.

The Chair of negotiations under the Kyoto Protocol has stated in his 'scenario note (para 15a)' (a kind of blueprint for the talks) that he wants to see forestry rules finalized at this meeting.

A call to finalize the talks in Bonn could create significant pressure to simply approve the draft decision that is on the table, which includes the logging loophole. The result is an increase of nearly 400 Megatons of CO2 every year that would be hidden and without penalty (see figure).

Climate Action Network International held a side event at the April 2010 Climate Talks discussing the problematic state of the draft LULUCF decision. You can watch the webcast of this side event including questions and comments from the audience.

Lively Discussion and a Draft Text

The side event I had organized yesterday for the Climate Action Network on LULUCF was a huge success. The room was packed with delegates from Japan, Tuvalu, the EU, USA, Korea, Turkey.

The event was billed as an opportunity to come hear CAN's detailed views on LULUCF and also discuss two new proposals on the table here in Bonn: the EU's "bar" and a very interesting submission from Tuvalu which included the idea of mandatory accounting of 'forest biomass decline,' as well as industrialized countries accepting accounting debits or emissions from wood that may have been imported from deforestation in developing countries.

There was lively, open and interesting discussion and debate following the presentations and we were blessed with the participation of the originators of these two ideas from the EU and Tuvalu.

Later in the afternoon there was a closed 'informal' LULUCF discussion amongst the Parties and the co-chairs of this group produced a draft text in the form of a 'non-paper' (just for discussion). It's the first attempt to put all the options in the form of legal text and is in that respect a step forward. But most of the various options for dealing with LULUCF are still represented somehow in this paper.

'The Bar' is there, including the prospect that each country could negotiate its own 'bar' against which forest management compliance is measured. Some of the interesting elements of Tuvalu's proposal are there too, but the 'forest biomass decline' concept is only partly intact.

Parties will meet one more time informally tomorrow morning and then openly in a contact group in the afternoon.