Hat tip to Dr Elvira Poloczanska of CSIRO of Marine Climate Change Report Card for Australia fame (among other things).

From the BBC (here)

By Richard Black, ,Environment correspondent, BBC News, Bonn

Rich countries accused of carbon ‘cheating’

Russia, Australia, Canada and some EU countries are among the accused.

The rules relate to land-use change, which can either release or absorb carbon, depending mainly on whether forests are planted or chopped down.

Rich countries, apart from the US, could account for about 5% of their annual emissions through this loophole.

The US is not involved in these negotiations because the proposals fall under the Kyoto Protocol, of which it – alone among developed countries – is not a part.

By way of comparison, 5% is roughly equal to the total emissions reduction that developed countries pledged to make between 1990 and 2012 under the Kyoto Protocol.

The benefit for some countries, notably Russia, would be much greater.

“This would allow developed countries to circumvent their obligations on reducing emissions,” said Melanie Coath, climate change policy office with the UK’s Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB), who has conducted analytical work on the draft text currently being negotiated.

“These are double standards that make us question the legitimacy of the whole process,” added Kevin Conrad, lead negotiator for Papua New Guinea and chairman of the Coalition for Rainforest Nations.

“If rich states tell us we have to adopt robust standards (for REDD) and then use forestry as their biggest get-out clause – it’s double standards, it’s climate fraud.”

Diplomats from developing countries have also criticised the proposals, which are under discussion during a fortnight of talks in Bonn under the UN climate convention (UNFCCC).

Some have suggested that rich countries would operate their forestry sectors under looser accounting rules than developing nations would face under the REDD mechanism (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation).

‘Fudge’ packet

Several different “fudges” are up for discussion in the draft text that would create the 5% (or 500 megatonnes of CO2) loophole.

One would allow countries to measure emission reductions or increases against a “forward-looking baseline”.

In other words, a country would decide how its land-use carbon emission or absorption would be likely to change in future, and then to measure actual performance against that baseline.

By contrast, developed nations have to measure emissions from every other sector of their economies simply for what they are – against a zero baseline.

– A second proposal, from Russia, would mean that countries would not have to count emissions from land-use change until land-use changes across the entire country resulted in net emissions.

Currently, Russia’s land-use sector is a big net absorber.

In addition, each governments could decide which aspects of land use change to include in its emission reports – which it would then compile and submit to the UN.

Delegates from some EU countries have suggested that others with large areas of forest – such as Austria, Finland and Sweden – are pushing for lax regulation, along with Russia and Australia.

But the European Commission’s chief negotiator, Artur Runge-Metzger, said the EU favoured tighter rules.

“Certainly from the EU side, what we want to see is a system where we have the highest environmental integrity that is possible,” he told BBC News.

“And also we don’t want to have rules tighter for developing countries than for developed countries.”

The UN talks here are due to conclude on Friday, and to set out some goalposts as governments look to the next UN climate summit in Cancun, Mexico, at the end of the year.

Small island states and many of the world’s poorest nations are demanding that Cancun must see agreement of a legally binding global treaty, but many others are pushing for a “bottom-up” approach that would seek small but concrete agreements in key areas such as REDD.

Some rich countries are seeking new rules under the UN climate convention, which campaigners say would allow them to gain credit for “business as usual”.

First go here for the PBS/NPR live stream. (it just keeps flowing out)

And then see this movie:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGX7krQYI_4&w=480&h=385]

As if the timing couldn’t be any worse, the Belize government has issued permits for oil exploration on the Belizean portion of the Meso-American reef in Central America.

See more on this here, here and here this press release just issued by WWF:

Potential Belize Offshore Oil Exploration threatens Coral Reef Health

BELIZE.- World Wildlife Fund (WWF) expressed great concern with news indicating that the Government of Belize has granted concessions to explore for oil and natural gas both offshore and on-shore.

Apparently, 18 concessions have been granted by the Belize Geology and Petroleum Department of which 8 are within the territorial waters of Belize. If true, this may generate potential risks for Belize’s barrier reef and the wider Mesoamerican Reef. WWF is particularly concerned that, apparently, concessions have been granted to carry out exploration within Belize’s marine protected areas including World Heritage Sites, and most of the terrestrial natural protected areas.

The Mesoamerican Reef covers nearly 115 million acres, from the northern end of the Yucatán Peninsula in Mexico and the Caribbean coasts of Belize and Guatemala, to the Bay Islands in northern Honduras.

Belize is a well known tourist destination, with large numbers of tourists flocking to its mainland and insular coast each year to dive or snorkel on its coral reefs, among other activities. In 2009 only, Belize received a total of 937,468 tourists (overnight and cruise tourism combined). An independent World Resources Institute (WRI) study found that Belize’s shoreline mangrove and coral reef system contributes between US$150-196 million a year only in tourism and recreation activities and represent between 12 and 15% of total country GDP. Its contribution to coastal protection was estimated to be around US$ 231-347 million. Belize depends on tourism as the primary economic motor. Compromising the integrity of ecosystems, quality of environmental services and landscape values can seriously damage the sector and the nation’s economy.

In WWF’s view, promoting oil and natural gas exploration within the Belize portion of the Mesoamerican Reef significantly increases the risks this fragile system already faces due to anthropogenic factors such as unsustainable coastal development, unsustainable fisheries and pollution.

WWF invites the Government of Belize to engage all actors in reviewing the need of such concessions, the risks associated to Belize’s diverse and rich marine resources and consider other economic alternatives for sustainable development and economic growth. WWF has been productively working with the Government of Belize and many environmental partners for many years, is most willing to continue working with the relevant authorities and offers its support in building an open, participatory, and transparent and scientifically based strategy for the sustainable development of the Mesoamerican Reef and the benefit of all its people and ecosystems.

As our region lives through one of the worst oil-related catastrophes the world has ever witnessed, and around 800,000 gallons of oil drain daily into the Gulf of Mexico with no end in sight, the urgency to find alternatives other than oil and gas production in the Mesoamerican Reef region are more than ever evident.