Rainforest Partnership

Environmental News & Discussion


February 22, 2010 by Niyanta

Copenhagen Accord

The Copenhagen Accord, a voluntary agreement drafted by Brazil, China, India, South Africa, and the United States at COP 15, does not represent the binding legal agreement hoped for by many in search of an extension or replacement of the Kyoto Protocol. It allowed countries to submit their individual reduced emissions pledges until January 31st, 2010, but did not set a global limit on emissions. One-hundred and four countries (as of 2/22/10)  are now associated with the accord, some of whom didn’t send in their formal intent until after the deadline and, many of whom did not pledge specific emissions reduction targets by 2020.

The accord has been criticized by many in the developed and the developing world and includes the EU, Australia, South Africa, and The Group of 77 (G77), a loose coalition of developing countries. Developing countries were unhappy due to their perceived lack of voice in the drafting process while several developed countries and large emerging powers viewed the document as unacceptable and disappointing. In the end, many small countries did approve of the accord language due to the concessions made and money pledged to aid developing countries in the adaptation process, but they did not pledge their own emissions reductions.

Of signifance, the accord does include language and commitments to fund reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD-plus) actions relevant to Rainforest Partnership and our mission. Six countries (US, UK, Norway, France, Japan, and Australia) have pledged $3.5 billion to support immediate action on REDD+ while the world waits for global REDD policy to be adopted. Their pledge represents a recognition and commitment by developed countries to protect the world’s forests.



December 17, 2009 by Niyanta

Pictures from Copenhagen



December 16, 2009 by Maurine

Live from Copenhagen: U.S. Climate Change Bill Update

I attended my first side event hosted by IETA (International Emissions Trading Association) this afternoon where U.S. congressional staffers discussed updates to the legislation and progress of the climate change bills (Waxmann-Markey, Boxer-Kerry) circulating in Congress. The Kerry-Boxer bill, which is a revision to the Waxmen-Markey bill that passed through the House, actually calls for higher reductions in CO2 equivalent emissions; 20% by 2020 as opposed to Waxman-Markey which called for 17% by 2020, but for the most part is still very similar to the Waxman-Markey bill. The Kerry-Boxer bill will more than likely evolve into the Kerry-Lieberman-Graham bill in the near future.

In order to mitigate the risk that senators from states whose economies are based on industries that will be more heavily hit by a climate bill will vote no to pass it, Laura Haynes who was representing Senator Carper of Delaware, stated that their office, among others, is working with senators from these states so that they can weigh in on the design of the future climate bill. These states are predominantly concerned with the targets for emissions reductions and that more incentives for carbon reductions strategies such as CCS (Carbon Capture and Storage) are included in the bill. The Senate, a place where any bill needs the support of a much thinner majority, will have a much harder time passing any climate legislation that does not meet the needs states with heavy manufacturing and mining bases.

Although everyone agreed that the climate bill needs to be voted on by June of next year, Chris Miller, from the Senate Majority Leader’s office, explained that the other pressing issues, with which Americans are currently more concerned, are the health care bill, financial reform and a jobs package. Another topic he explained was of utmost importance in moving the climate bill forward is to address the reluctance that the general public has about implementing a carbon market as a mechanism to reduce greenhouse gases and specifically, the rumor that it may create another a sub prime mortgage crisis.

When asked about their thoughts on the outcome of negotiations at the COP 15 on a future climate bill in the U.S., all panelists said that an agreement needs to be made to demonstrate to the Senate that the rest of the world is serious and ready for the U.S. to come on board and take charge in reducing its emissions as one of the worlds’ largest producers of greenhouse gas emissions.


rainforest