Yesterday, Donald Trump announced that the US would pull out of the Paris Agreement. His statement is riddled with mistakes, misleading statements, and utter nonsense.
On 1 June 2017 Donald Trump announced that the US has left the Paris Agreement. Yesterday, I wrote that there were two ways of leaving: leaving the Paris Agreement (which would take four years); or leaving the UNFCCC (which would take one year). Trump isn’t taking either of these options. Instead, Trump is taking what Richard Black on the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit website calls the “truly nuclear option”.
This afternoon in the White House Rose Garden, President Donald Trump is due to announce whether the US will leave the Paris Agreement. Predictably enough, Trump revealed the time and place via a tweet. According to Jonathan Swan at Axios, Trump has already decided to leave the Paris Agreement.
Almost 4,000 people are currently in Bonn, taking part in the latest UN climate talks. Many of them will have travelled there by aeroplane. Of course, it’s an important meeting. So important that Indonesia felt the need to register 58 people to take part. But reducing emissions from aviation is not on the agenda in Bonn. There is no mention of aviation in the Paris Agreement.
Yet another UN climate conference is taking place in Bonn. This week and next week sees the forty-sixth sessions of the Subsidiary Body for Implementation and the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice. And the third part of the first session of the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Paris Agreement.
In December 2013, UN climate negotiators agreed the Warsaw Framework for REDD plus. This included a decision on summary of information on safeguards. At the time I described this decision as staggeringly weak. The decision reached in Bonn earlier this month, manages to make the text even weaker.
The text on REDD safeguards was agreed in 2010 at the UN climate negotiations in Cancún, Mexico. What exactly are these safeguards? This post takes a detailed look at the text of the seven safeguards agreed in Cancún.
The usual power politics have kicked in at the UN climate negotiations. Several days of friendly chats at COP20 in Lima saw little progress but no really big arguments. Then on Thursday morning, 11 December 2014, G77 and China asked for a halt to the discussions.
Reactions to the Warsaw REDD deal are still coming in. Here are two very different reactions from two Indigenous Peoples organisations. The first, from the Indigenous Peoples Biocultural Climate Change Assessment Initiative (IPCCA), is critical. The second, from the Tebtebba Foundation, is optimistic.
“Amid cheers and applause negotiators announced the completion of the REDD+ program design.” That’s Pipa Elias, REDD+ and agriculture expert for the Union of Concerned Scientists, responding to the Warsaw REDD decisions on Friday.