At COP 21Ban Ki Moon, in Paris, urged states to negotiate with a global vision not with national vested interests (Cop21 press conference)
A global vision would be to address article 2 of the UNFCCC and at a minimum to immediately end all subsidies for fossil fuel, to calculate the carbon budget for each state,
to divest in fossil fuels and to reinvest in renewable energy, to conserve sinks -such as old growth forests and bogs, to strengthen conservation of biodiversity,
to avoid all false solutions such as nuclear, geo-engineering and biofuels which would all violate principles within the UNFCCC, to compensate for historical emissions,
and to institute a fair and just transition for workers affected negatively by the new vision. and to promote nature based solutions and socially equitable
and environmentally sound such as solar, wind, tidal, and geothermal
COP22 must avoid the systemic constraints that undermined COP21
SYSTEMIC CONSTRAINTS PREVENTING THE COMMITMENT TO URGENCY
IN COP21 IN THE PREAMBLE IS THE “RECOGNITION THAT CLIMATE CHANGE REPRESENTS AN URGENT AND POTENTIALLY IRREVERSIBLE THREAT TO HUMAN SOCIETY AND THE PLANET” YET THE EXISTENCE OF SYDTEMIC CONSTRAINTS PREVENTED COP21 FROM EMBODYING THIS RECOGNITION
1.THE BEST IS THE ENEMY OF THE GOOD- THE COMPROMISERS CREDO
2 BASELINES TARGETS TIMEFRAMES WERE ALL OUT OF SYNC
3. -EXPEDIENT OMISSION; GLOBAL CARBON BUDGET. HISTORICAL AND PER CAPITA EMISSIONS
4. THE SHORTNESS OF INSTITUTIONAL MEMORY AND THE UNDERMINING OF LEGAL OBLIGATIONS FROM ARTICLE 2 3 AND 4
5. A SOLUTION SHOULD NEVER BE EQUALLY BAD OR WORSE THAN THE PROBLEM IT IS INTENDED TO SOLVE
6.SOME STATES ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHER
7. THE LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR; THE TYRANNY OF CONSENSUS
8 THE FAILURE TO REVERSE THE EXEMPTION FOR THE CONTRIBUTION TO GREEMHOUSE GAS EMISSION
9. RELUCTANCE TO USE THE INTERNATIONAL COURT AGAINST THE MAJOR EMMITTERS FOR THEY VIOLATIONS OF ARTICLE 2 OF THE UNFCCC
10. IGNORING COMMITMMENT FOR FUNDING SOURCE
FIRST SYSTEMIC CONSTRAINT
THE BEST IS THE ENEMY OF THE GOOD
ALL STATES SHOULD HAVE ACTED TO FULFILL
SDG 13 AND ON BAN KI MOON'S CALL FOR NEGOTIATING WITH A GLOBAL VISION
In SDG13 on climate change, addressing climate change is described as urgent; climate change could jeopardize the fulfillment of most of the SDGs. and the key biodiversity areas.
In 1988, at the Changing Atmosphere Conference in Toronto, the participants including representatives from government, academia, NGO and industry expressed their concern about Climate Change in the Conference statement:
“Humanity is conducting an unintended, uncontrolled, globally pervasive experiment whose ultimate consequence could be second only to a global nuclear war. the Earth’s atmosphere is being changed at an unprecedented rate by pollutants resulting from human activities, inefficient and wasteful fossil fuel use ... These changes represent a major threat to international security and are already having harmful consequences over many parts of the globe.... it is imperative to act now.
The Conference called for immediate action by governments,
to Reduce CO2 emissions by approximately 20% of 1988 levels by the year 2005 as an initial global goal. Clearly the industrialized nations have a responsibility to lead the way both through their national energy policies and their bilateral multilateral assistance arrangement.
Ban Ki Moon, in Paris, urged states to negotiate with a global vision not with national vested interests (COP 21 press conference)
A global vision would be to address article 2 and at a minimum to immediately end all subsidies for fossil fuel, to calculate the carbon budget for each state, to divest in fossil fuels and to reinvest in renewable energy, to conserve sinks -such as old growth forests and bogs (not just as a means to offset emissions), to strengthen conservation of biodiversity, to avoid all false solutions such as nuclear, geo-engineering and biofuels which would all violate principles within the UNFCCC, promote nature-based solutions along with solar energy, wind energy, wave and geothermal and to compensate for historical emissions, and to institute a fair and just transition for workers affected negatively by the new vision.
In 2016 the global community is in danger of non-compliance with the purpose of the legally binding United Nations Framework on Climate Change( article 2)
..."to achieve, in accordance with the relevant provisions of
the Convention, stabilization of greenhouse gas
concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent
AT COP21 BAN KI-MOON URGED STATES TO NEGOTIATE WITH A GLOBAL VISION NOT FROM SPECIFIC NATIONAL INTERESTS”
WHAT COP21 SHOULD HAVE BEEN WAS A NEW GLOBAL VISION WTIH LEGALLY BINDING ACTIONS TO FINALLY IMPLEMENT THE BINDING COMMITMENTS AND ADHERE TO THE PRINCIPLES IN THE LEGALLY BINDING 1992 UN FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE UNFCCC
ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE NEGOTIATIONS, GOVERNMENTS WERE TALKING ABOUT THEIR REDLINES: I.E. WE WILL NOT AGREE TO A DOCUMENT IF X IS IN THE TEXT OR IF X IS NOT IN THE TEXT.
THERE MUST BE NO COMPROMISE TO ACCOMMODATE THE TRUMP GOVERNMENT; INSTEAD THERE MUST BE A STRONG LEGALLY BINDING DOCUMENT THAT COULD BE USED TO SUE THE US AND OTHER NON-COOPERATING FOSSIL FUEL STATES FOR VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 2 OF THE LEGALLY BINDING UNFCCC