Richard Bradley, IEA, presented global trends in energy consumption and carbon emissions, noting that 80% of emissions in 2002 originated from 22 countries representing 80% of the global gross domestic product (GDP).
Laura Cozzi, IEA, presented on the world energy outlook. She said without major policy changes, global emissions will grow by 62% between 2002 and 2030, with developing countries’ emissions surpassing those of developed countries in the 2020s.

Cédric Philibert, IEA, discussed solar power technologies, stressed that their market potential depends on geographic location and sunlight levels, and noted that existing facilities are concentrated in countries that are not bound by Kyoto Protocol commitments, such as the US, Australia and some developing countries. He outlined IEA’s work to facilitate international collaboration on solar energy but stressed that national policies remain decisive.

Lewis Fulton, IEA, said long-term transport technologies such as hydrogen fuel cells and electric engines face significant obstacles such as high production costs and storage difficulties, and that market penetration of hydrogen technologies before 2020 is unlikely. Fulton stressed the promise of short-term options such as fuel economy improvements, biofuels production, and changes in transport systems, emphasizing that they can produce dramatic carbon reductions at very low costs.

Elliot Diringer, Pew Center, introduced the ongoing “Climate Dialogue” concerning the post-Kyoto era and aiming to develop “strawman proposals” on how to strengthen the climate regime. He said key issues include how to: engage major emitters; provide flexibility to accommodate national circumstances; integrate climate and development; adopt activity-based approaches; couple near-term action with long-term strategies; and address adaptation needs.

Jonathan Pershing, World Resources Institute (WRI), said in order to assist the “Climate Dialogue,” the WRI has compiled information on: GHG emissions, population and gross domestic product (GDP); carbon intensity; per capita emissions; emissions projections; and vulnerability and capacity.

Daniel Bodansky, University of Georgia, introduced the Pew Center’s report “International Climate Efforts beyond 2012: A Survey of the Process.” He said the report includes proposals on future negotiations within or outside the UNFCCC framework, the types of mitigation commitments required, adaptation, and implementation and compliance.

Amb. Michael Zammit Cutajar, Malta, said the “Climate Dialogue” provides political and economic reality checks and aims to provide options rather than set solutions.

Gao Feng, Chinese Ministry for Foreign Affairs, said future negotiations should be based on the UNFCCC as the legal and political framework, use sustainable development as a key principle, adopt a bottom-up approach, and combine technology with policies and measures.

Chadrashekhar Dasgupta, The Energy and Resources Institute (Teri), said the downward trend in carbon intensity in some developing countries may not entail the decoupling of growth and emissions in the long-term due to inter-sectoral shifts.

Hisashi Ishitani, Keio University, presented a report on global energy issues, noting that by 2030 global energy demand will increase by 60% and energy investments in developing countries will reach US$7.9 trillion, exceeding those in developed countries. He identified possible solutions to energy problems, including government cooperation on capacity building, private sector collaboration in improving energy efficiency, encouraging “unilateral CDM” projects, and simplifying additionality tests and baseline methodologies.

In a panel discussion, Amb. Chandrashekhar Dasgupta, India, said CDM plays only a marginal role in mitigating emissions from developing countries, and recommended developing nuclear energy CDM projects, using soft credits to improve technology transfer, and outsourcing technological research to reduce costs.

Gao Feng, Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said the Kyoto Protocol process presents a historic opportunity to solve energy problems and achieve sustainable development, pointed out that CDM is playing a marginal role in reducing emissions in developing countries, and stressed that the number of CDM projects depends on the size of the carbon market.

Amb. Masaki Konishi, Japan, listed possible actions toward a low-carbon economy, including changing lifestyles, implementation of CDM projects, integration of trade and development for technology transfer, and use of technology as an incentive for universal participation in current and future international policy frameworks.

Andrei Marcu, International Emissions Trading Association, stressed the central role of market mechanisms in technology development and transfer, identified cost-effective use of capital as a key policy driver, and advocated a shift to a sector-based versus country-based approach to climate change.

Akio Morishima, Japan’s Industrial Structure Council, presented Japan’s efforts to reduce GHG emissions, indicated that Japan has the highest energy efficiency among developed countries, and stressed that this makes its marginal abatement costs very high.

Harlan Watson, US Department of State, said the private sector accounts for 90% of all foreign investments in the energy sector, stressed the importance of mainstreaming climate change in the sustainable development policies of developing countries, and called for win-win solutions to poverty and climate change.

Lisa Jacobson, BCSE, noted that her organization promoted the prompt start of small-scale CDM projects and the standardization of baselines, while opposing investment additionality for CDM projects.

Jose Eduardo Sanhueza, CDM Executive Board (EB), stressed that additionality is a crucial concept despite it never having been mentioned in the Kyoto Protocol or the Marrakesh Accords. He noted that the EB’s additionality tool is not mandatory and project developers can continue to develop other tools.

Marcelo Junqueira, Econergy, discussed the additionality of the Vale do Rosario CDM project, based on a barrier test, and lamented the EB’s additionality tool.

Tod Delaney, First Environment, said additionality analyses remain difficult to perform, validators’ decisions based on these analyses are highly subjective and that these factors introduce uncertainty into CDM validations.

Horst Biedermann, European Insulation Manufacturers Association, cautioned that the EU may fail to meet its Kyoto commitment if the emissions reductions potential of buildings is not considered.

Mark Trexler, Trexler Climate and Energy Services, said the CDM’s main problem is the imbalance between supply and demand resulting from the US and Australian opposition to ratifying the Kyoto Protocol, since the supply remains the same. He concluded that since the demand for carbon credits cannot be increased, the supply needs to be reduced.

John Kadyszewski, Winrock International, said a way to reduce the CDM supply is to strengthen the sustainable development objective.

Jorge Barrigh, Corporación Andina de Fomento, called for supplementary proposals on additionality from business to ensure that the CDM will deliver.

Ben Pearson, CDM Watch, stressed that the CDM does not imply new emissions reductions but transfers the reduction from an Annex I to a non-Annex I country, noting that “fake Certified Emissions Reductions” that are not additional will undermine the Kyoto reduction targets.

Lars-Otto Reiersen, Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme, described the effects of climate change on indigenous peoples in the Arctic. He indicated that the environment has become less predictable, that travel modes must be adapted to thinning of the ice, and that access to resources has become restricted with negative impacts on human health, food security and culture.