At the same time, an Environmental Defence Fund document states that emissions trading schemes can « reduce political opposition to more ambitious targets, » citing examples from the EU`s emissions trading system, the regional greenhouse gas initiative and California`s cap-and-trade programme. It concludes that climate ambitions with global carbon markets could almost double over the next 15 years compared to current NPNs. In its efforts to take action on the fight against climate change for all, CCI – on behalf of 45 million companies in more than 100 countries – calls on the parties to reach a conclusion on the effective and transparent implementation of Article 6 at the COP25 climate negotiations in December 2019. This will help achieve our ambitious climate goals and ensure a sustainable and inclusive low-carbon future. Another unique aspect of the mechanism is its objective of mobilizing the private sector through appropriate incentives to contribute to climate change mitigation. The Paris Agreement will thus offer sub-national actors the opportunity to directly use the mechanism defined in Article 6.4. The IETA report, which models up to $250 billion in reduced costs to meet current climate targets, says targets could be raised by 50% if Eastern European countries were « inspired to invest these economies in enhanced ambitions. » This would eliminate an additional 5 billion tonnes of CO2 equivalent (GtCO2e) per year by 2030, contrary to current commitments that would save 10GtCO2e. MADRID – When two weeks of U.N. climate talks begin Monday in Madrid, a controversial topic will occupy diplomats more than anyone else. The successful implementation of Article 6 could not only serve as a driver for carbon pricing, but could also create new channels for climate finance and lead to technology transfer and capacity building. According to a World Bank report, 96 country-specific climate commitments – about half of all NCCs – relate to the use of carbon pricing initiatives. It proposes that the cost of running the current NPNs be 50% « in principle… a global, friction-free carbon market. » When BASIC countries (Brazil, South Africa, India, China) met in Beijing in October 2019 to discuss climate change, they reaffirmed their determination to conclude discussions on Article 6, including « ensuring environmental integrity and preventing double counting. » At the international climate summit in Madrid in December 2019, climate negotiators will once again attempt to finalize the Article 6 « regulatory framework » that will govern voluntary international cooperation on climate change issues, including carbon markets.
In order to truly understand the task entrusted to them and the main areas of disagreement that remain, the first point of contact is the text of Article 6 of the Paris Agreement itself, presented in annotated form in the graph below. This is particularly relevant for nations considered to be most vulnerable to the effects of climate change, which have spoken loud and clear in the negotiations on the risks of weak Article 6 rules. A little-known and highly technical passage of the Paris Agreement could « make or break » the regime – and its goal of avoiding dangerous climate change. While this debate may seem rather dry, the choice of a specific accounting approach has the potential to determine whether a country considers its climate goals to be met or not. This causes political turmoil in otherwise technical accounting negotiations. A lack of agreement on solving this problem reflects the technical challenges it poses and not the political differences on the appropriate solution, says former co-chair Kizzier. If the rules of Article 6 are to be adopted, a number of overlapping and contradictory national priorities – a veritable « four-dimensional spaghetti » of red lines – must be unleashed during the d