Download TURKEY`S POSITION IN RELATION TO THE KYOTO PROTOCOL

TURKEY’S POSITION IN RELATION
TO THE KYOTO PROTOCOL
AND THE POST 2012 FRAMEWORK
Presented by Anna Kaplina
Opportunities in the Carbon Market
June 2009
Content
Current climate change negotiations
EU international climate change policy
Turkey’s current position and next steps
Turkey and the new emissions trading mechanisms
Low-carbon Development Strategies
Conclusions
1
Current situation in the international CC negotiations
9The KP under amendment (AWG-KP) - new binding
commitments for developed countries, improvement of
flexible mechanisms
9The UNFCCC implementation to be strengthened
(AWG-LCA) - new structures for mitigation, adaptation,
financing, technology transfer, capacity building to be
designed
In Bali (2007) developing countries agreed to seek ways to make
“measurable, reportable and verifiable” (MVR) emissions cuts
trough implementing of Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions
(NAMAs)
In Copenhagen (December 2009) Parties to agree on the main
features of the post 2012 climate change regime, both under the
KP and the UNFCCC
2
Recent EU climate change international policy
EC Communication 28/01/2009 “Towards a Comprehensive Climate
Change Agreement in Copenhagen”
• emission reduction commitments for at least
– all countries listed in Annex I to the UNFCCC
– all OECD member countries
– all current EU Member States, EU candidate countries and
potential candidates
• to engage with developing countries, especially with the
economically more advanced ones, so that they take
appropriate actions that will deliver collectively a deviation of
15-30 % below business as usual in 2020
• all developing countries, should commit to adopting lowcarbon development strategies by the end of 2011
3
Implications for Turkey
High expectations of the world and of the EU on
Turkey that it will undertake commitments
However, possibilities of Turkey to take binding
commitments are limited
Urgent actions are needed to position Turkey in the
post 2012 regime
4
Context - Turkey
9High levels of total GHG emissions
9Rapid growth of the GHG emissions due to economic
and population growth
9Low GDP per capita, low CO2 per capita
9Some measures to reduce GHG emissions in place or
planned, incl. development of NCCAP
5
Greenhouse gases emission trends by sectors
300
250
150
100
50
0
-50
20
06
20
05
20
04
20
03
20
02
20
01
20
00
19
99
19
98
19
97
19
96
19
95
19
94
19
93
19
92
19
91
-100
19
90
CO2 eq. (million tones)
200
Year
Energy
Indust rial P rocesses
Agricult ure
Wast e
Land use and land use change
6
Turkey’s situation – unique and rather complicated
Member of the OECD
Annex I, but Decision 26/CP.7 - in a position that is
different to that of other Annex I countries
Party to the KP (26 August 2009), but not in Annex B
Candidate for EU membership
Not able to participate in KP flexible mechanisms
7
Options for Turkey
Option
Annex B
Negotiate special
position
(non Annex B)
Consequences
Meeting the expectations, but difficult to define and
comply, possible JI
Not meeting the expectations, including those of the
EU, but easier to comply and reflects the national
circumstances.
NAMAs to be in place, possible sectoral emissions
trading
Outside of the new Outside of the international arena, problems with all
other related international treaties and EU
2012 regime
membership
8
Where is Turkey currently and what is next? (1)
Turkey has already announced its plans to take
NAMAs for emission limitation and to adopt “no-lose
target”
This should be further advanced in estimating
concrete numbers for deviation from the BAU and
development of a Low-Carbon Development Strategy
(LCDS). For this purpose an extensive national
dialogue has to be triggered urgently
Extensive coordination with EU is critical when Turkey
is shaping its position
9
Where is Turkey currently and what is next? (2)
Turkey should closely observe negotiations about
possible new country grouping under the KP
Annexes. The country should position itself
accordingly
Negotiations are continuing on removing Turkey’s
name from the proposed negotiating text for Annex
B list
Turkey should position itself in a way that will enable
participation in the possible new flexible mechanisms
10
Where is Turkey currently and what is next? (3)
Two additional negotiating meetings (10-14 August,
Bonn and 02-06 November, Barcelona) of the AWG-KP
and AWG-LCA will provide more opportunities for
Turkey to negotiate its position
New text for the further commitments of the Annex I
Parties under the KP to be distributed on 17 June 2009,
possible submission on Turkey’s position towards
Annex B and flexible mechanisms
Proposals for long-term cooperative actions under
UNFCCC, incl. shared vision, mitigation, adaptation,
financing, technology transfer and capacity building to
be forwarded to the meeting in August
11
Flexible mechanisms and Turkey
Turkey is Annex I, but not Annex B, therefore not eligible
neither for JI nor for CDM
The only option - Voluntary Carbon Market
In the future Turkey will possibly have the same status, but
eventually it may be able to implement sectoral emissions
trading and NAMAs emissions trading
12
Sectoral emissions trading
(under negotiations)
Parties not included in Annex B (some proposals
non Annex I) may propose sectoral emissions
targets (EU, as part of their LCDS)
Sectoral emissions targets should deviate
significantly from BAU for those sectors
Efficiently monitored, reported and reviewed
Parties with sectoral emission targets may
participate in emissions trading
Modalities to be further developed by COP
13
NAMAs emissions trading
(under negotiations)
NAMAs crediting mechanism under the KP is under
consideration
Credits from verifiable NAMAs of the non Annex I Parties
(non Annex B) can be issued in order to assist the
achievement of SD and contributing to combating climate
change
Modalities to be further decided by COP (CDM rules and
bodies might be used)
NAMAs part of a LCDS (EU and Turkey)
14
Low Carbon Development Strategy (LCDS)
(LCDS) should include:
Emissions inventory, incl. key parameters (e.g. emission intensity) and a
projection of BAU emissions for key sectors
Portfolio of actions to address emissions in key sectors following a twotrack approach:
• autonomous action (mainly “win-win” and low-cost action), mainly to be
financed and implemented by the country itself, could be supported by
capacity building and targeted international loan schemes;
• internationally supported action requiring assistance in the form of financing,
technology or capacity building.
9Estimates of emission reduction targets for each category
of action, in the short term (2020-2030) and with
identification of long-term (2050) targets
9Specific needs to support implementation
15
CONCLUSIONS
Urgent actions needed to formulate Turkey’s positions in order to
participate efficiently in the international negotiation process, incl.
numbers for the deviation from the BAU for the whole country
Whether included in Annex B or not, Turkey has already
announced taking on “no-lose target” and should switch to lowcarbon development, employing national efforts and international
support
Government and industry should further strengthen their
capacities and cooperate at international and national levels
Possibilities to participate in the new emissions trading
mechanisms should be utilized
16
Thank you!
[email protected]
17