Coverage of Selected Side Events at the
Lima Climate Change Conference - December 2014

The aim of NAMA Day was to showcase how transformational Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs) are contributing towards moving developing countries along a low-emissions development trajectory. The three-hour event was organized in a series of panel discussions, and concluded with a poster exhibition and help desk to enable one-on-one interactions with a wide range of public and private international organizations involved in providing NAMA support.

OPENING SESSION

Introducing this session, moderator Donald Cooper, UNFCCC Secretariat, noted NAMAs are an instrument to contribute towards national sustainable development and close the pre-2020 ambition gap.

Manuel Pulgar-Vidal, COP 20 President and Minister of Environment, Peru, offered five reflections on what NAMAs mean at the national level, noting that this process: entails recognizing “our responsibility” towards emission reduction; requires comprehensive planning to assure a sustainable future; provides an opportunity to build trust that countries can change and improve their behavior; enables a multi-sectoral, multi-stakeholder and multi-level planning approach that fosters good governance; and provides a mechanism for moving from talk to action.

Christiana Figueres, UNFCCC Executive Secretary, began by expressing solidarity with all those affected by Typhoon Hagupit in the Philippines, calling it a “sobering” reminder of the urgent need to link mitigation, disaster risk reduction and  adaptation actions. She underscored the need for mitigation action before 2020, noting that NAMAs can help countries in this regard, but cautioned that they need to be based on national circumstances and integrated into the overall development planning process.

Rodrigo Suárez Castaño, Climate Change Director, Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development, Colombia, noted the first step in bridging the country’s pre-2020 ambition gap is to understand its current and future emissions, through developing a greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory and emissions scenario. He said the country’s low carbon development strategy is centered on three visions: inclusive and sustainable cities; sustainable production in territories of peace; and equitable access to energy.

Responding to questions from participants on how to position NAMAs within the development planning process, Pulgar-Vidal noted that in Peru, this involved making the case that combating climate change is a development issue by fully integrating NAMAs in national planning processes. Castaño highlighted the need to package climate change information in terms of co-benefits, saying that “if we change the language then other sectors can start to understand and we can have a joint process.”

On key messages for COP 20, Figueres said that countries have been building their capacity over time, starting with pilot mitigation projects to test technologies and institutional innovations, before scaling them into Program of Activities (PoAs) and NAMAs, and are now ready to “run the marathon” by developing their Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs).

PANEL DISCUSSION ON NAMA FINANCING
This session, moderated by Yamil Bonduki, UNDP, discussed perspectives of private investors and development banks on opportunities to finance climate actions and remove barriers to NAMA implementation.

Katrin Enting, KfW Development Bank, discussed lessons from three NAMAs funded by the Bank in Latin America.  She emphasized that NAMA criteria assist as a first indicator, but political alignment and support are critical to attract finance. She summarized key messages as, inter alia: keep it simple; use proven instruments, including equity guarantees and concessionary loans; bridge the tension between ambition and available financing; ensure implementing agencies have the requisite capacity; and involve development banks early in the process.

Martin Schoenberg, Climate Change Capital, presented on how to leverage private sector capital for NAMAs. He noted that the focus on project financing, which has been the main funding modality for climate projects in the past, does not attract the “mainstay” of the financial system, notably bonds and equity financing. He stressed that “industrial-scale corporate structures” are needed to fully capture the potential of renewables by aggregating smaller plants in order to create large-scale repeatable business. He further noted that emerging economies present a unique opportunity as investors are willing to forego immediate profits and “stay for the long haul.”

Balgis Osman-Elasha, African Development Bank (AfDB) said the Bank supports African countries to access finance and build their institutional and human capacities for NAMA preparation and implementation. She highlighted projects under AfDB’s Climate Investment Fund focusing on renewable energy and energy efficiency.

Camilo Rojas, Development Bank of Latin America (CAF), outlined the Bank’s support for NAMA implementation in the region, noting key lessons include the need for financing to be contextualized, and for countries to be supported in undertaking a structured INDC process. He noted that a key factor in accessing NAMA financing is the “appetite and commitment” of stakeholders around the NAMAs.

During discussions, participants highlighted, inter alia, the need to: move from planning to action; mobilize additional funding to meet current demand in the NAMA registry; target a range of donors to fund different stages of the NAMA process; and explore ways to speed up the NAMA readiness stage as “private funders are waiting to invest.” 

PRESENTATION OF NAMAs AND INFORMATION ON SUPPORT

During this final session, moderated by Sudhir Sharma, UNEP DTU Partnership, participants heard the experiences of NAMA financiers, as well as countries that are currently preparing or implementing NAMAs.

Miriam Ott, NAMA Facility, highlighted ongoing projects funded under the Germany-UK initiative, noting it is the first to provide earmarked funds for NAMA implementation. She said the Facility has defined clear selection criteria based on mitigation ambition, sustainable development co-benefits and potential to drive transformational change.

Javier Andrés Hubenthal, Ecuador, highlighted the country’s emission reduction programmes, noting the NAMA has been funded from own resources as well as leveraging concessionary funding.

Angelo Sartori, Chile, described the country’s forestry NAMA, which aims to reduce emissions related to forest degradation and regenerate native forests. He said the country is exploring incentive mechanisms for smallholder farmers to conserve forest resources, as well as pursuing South-South cooperation with neighboring countries.

Telmo De la Cruz Muscari, Peru, described the country’s sustainable transport NAMA, noting it has developed a policy matrix to achieve the aim of an integrated urban transport system. He said among the expected co-benefits are less noise and stress, shorter travel times and improved road safety. He announced that the NAMA has been pre-selected for funding under the NAMA Facility’s second call.

Prasert Sirinapaporn, Thailand, highlighted the country’s roadmap to reduce emissions from refrigeration and cooling equipment. He said the the NAMA aims to enhance private-public collaboration, ensure effective steering and coordination, define a transparent and accountable work process, and realize innovations beyond business as usual.

Chebet Maikut, Uganda, said NAMA formulation in the country has been a participatory process that identified four critical sectors with high transformational potential for the local community. He said the eight priority NAMAs developed as a result, have been submitted to the NAMA registry.

Paola Visca, Uruguay, said the National Coordinating Entity led by the Ministry of Environment brought together all the key sectors to develop a national plan to respond to climate change. She highlighted the energy, transport and agricultural sectors as priority NAMA areas.

Faustin Munyazikwiye, Rwanda, outlined the NAMA preparation process, highlighting: a sectoral analysis of critical sectors; determination of baseline emissions in 2010; and undertaking of enabling activities, such as capacity building of local stakeholders. He said the preparation of seven NAMA information notes is currently underway. 

Gina Paniagua Sánchez, Vice-Minister for Agriculture and Livestock, Costa Rica, introduced the country’s livestock NAMA, noting it aims to contribute to a more eco-competitive livestock sector. She highlighted some of the expected co-benefits of integrating the NAMA with a broader focus on climate smart agriculture, including soil conservation and restoration, improved ecosystem services and improved incomes for farmers.

Vahakn Kabakian, Lebanon, described the country’s NAMAs for the waste and transport sectors, noting they are expected to contribute to emissions reductions of 30% and 70% respectively, by 2040.

This side event, moderated by Yamil Bonduki, UN Development Programme, addressed socio-economic repercussions of climate change on three vital sectors in Lebanon: water, energy and agriculture. In addition, participants considered an analysis of the country’s 2014 drought illustrating potential future climate impacts, and a model of South-South cooperation illustrated by an analysis of the Brazilian model and its applications on Lebanon.

Vahakn Kabakian, Ministry of Environment, Lebanon, introduced the event, underscoring the economic repercussions of climate change and the need to effectively address them.

Leila El Sayed, Ministry of Environment and Ministry of Finance, Lebanon, presented a study on optimizing the renewable energy mix for the country. She provided a background on the Lebanese energy sector and addressed the target of reaching 12% of total energy supply from renewables by 2020. El Sayed focused on, inter alia: comparing investment costs of different technologies through the leveled cost of electricity; incorporating uncertainty; and analyzing the economic losses for the economy under business-as-usual scenarios. Regarding policy recommendations, the study concluded that: legal amendments are needed to allow private sector involvement in renewable energy production; the electricity tariff paid by end-users should be increased; and a technology-specific and size-specific scheme needs to be implemented to increase confidence in the renewables market for private investors.

Addressing the Lebanese water sector, Nadim Farajalla, AUB-IFI, provided background information in relation to total renewable water resources, as well as regarding water policies and managing bodies. He underscored population and climate change as important stressors on water resources and reviewed drought incidents since 1920 before focusing on the 2014 drought. Farajalla then presented results of a study of the industry, tourism, agriculture and household sectors, addressing, among others: cost of water; decrease in water consumption; change in commodity prices; demand for private vendors; and adaptation activities. He concluded, inter alia, that: Lebanon was not legally nor technically prepared to face the drought; high costs were recorded for the sectors researched; and a cross-ministerial body to draft a proper drought management plan and a National Climate Change Adaptation Strategy is essential.

Edson Domingues, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Brazil, presented a number of studies focusing on Lebanon and Brazil, and the potential for South-South cooperation. He addressed the economics of climate change in Lebanon in relation to agriculture, in a bid to identify related costs and mainly affected regions. At the macroeconomic level, he calculated the cost at 7.22% of the 2010 Lebanese GDP and also provided data in terms of total welfare. Domingues then presented similar research in Brazil, taking into account vulnerability studies, and highlighted a model for South-South cooperation underscoring, among others: mitigation options in key sectors; policy alternatives and costs associated to reducing greenhouse gas emissions; and potential areas for cooperation between Brazil and Lebanon.

In the ensuing discussion, participants addressed, inter alia: risks associated with not meeting the renewables targets in Lebanon; commitment and political will concerning changes in the energy mix; cost of carbon; rainfall changes in regard to hydropower; ways to expand potential co-benefits from adaptation and mitigation; crop substitution and hybridized crops; and the Lebanese positions in relation to the Arab Group in the climate negotiations.

This event was moderated by Ahmed Al-Hazmi, SABIC, and considered various carbon management initiatives in Saudi Arabia and Qatar, including carbon sequestration through enhanced oil recovery (EOR), Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) certified projects, and the management of gas flares.

Ahmed Al-Eidan, Saudi Aramco, highlighted the work of the organization’s corporate carbon management team, which focuses on mutually-beneficial technology-driven mitigation efforts, noting Saudi Arabia’s leading role in the Middle East on issues of flare reduction and energy conservation. He outlined the team’s technology roadmap which focuses on stationary and mobile carbon management, industrial applications, CO2 sequestration in saline aquifers, and CO2 sequestration through EOR. Al Eidan described the development of an enhanced monitoring and surveillance technique to assess CO2 potential in the long-term, including the use of seismic and electromagnetic waves to measure, map and monitor changes in CO2 emissions.

Ali Al Anazi, SABIC, outlined the activities of Al-Bayroni, a joint Qatar-Taiwan venture, to gain CDM certification on two sites in the East of Qatar: an ammonia plant energy optimization project; and a project to improve the energy efficiency in a fossil fuel-fired steam boiler system. He noted the criteria for CDM certification, including that the projects must: be located in non-Annex I countries; have environmental impacts as well as additional emissions reduction potential; and use approved methodology. He informed delegates that the operationalization of the two CDM projects, now undergoing validation, is equivalent to planting 12 million trees.

Mohammed Almarri, Qatar Fuel Additives Company, made a technical presentation drawing attention to a Carbon Dioxide Recovery (CDR) plant in Qatar, highlighting work to reduce CO2 emissions in methanol recovery.

Salem Qahtani, Saudi Aramco, spoke on a flare minimization programme, stressing his company’s goal of attaining zero flaring in the near future. He described an in-house flare monitoring system, which aims to mitigate and monitor gas flares across all company sites, drawing attention to awards issued to the company for its efforts in flare reduction.

In the discussion, participants considered, inter alia, government interventions promoting carbon management; guidelines for managing flares; the effectiveness of the CDR process; the need to separate issues of biodiversity and those of economic diversification; potential for and challenges of greening the Gulf, including through artificial forests; and the impact of environmental negotiations on carbon capture and storage (CCS) development.

This side event, moderated by Chien-Te Fan, National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan, focused on how Climate Action can bridge the financial and technical gap relating to climate change strategies in the developing world. Participants heard presentations on the development of an “incubation mechanism initiative” for island countries to enhance resilience to climate change and the public awareness of the green economy. 

Robert Dixon, Global Environment Facility (GEF), reiterated the recent World Meteorological Organization (WMO) announcement that 2014 recorded the highest average global temperatures, expressing hope that an agreement will be reached at the Paris 2015 climate conference. Mentioning the typhoon bearing down on the Philippines, he said this extreme event should remind us that ours is a fragile earth which requires urgent action from governments to arrest carbon emissions.

Taukelina Finikaso, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Tuvalu, stated that his country completed its first National Adaptation Programme of Action (NAPA) in 2007, and is currently finalizing its second NAPA, outlining institutional problems as the main challenge. He urged process reform to expedite accessing the funds, and expressed hope that the newly established Green Climate Fund (GCF) will not suffer from the same challenges, saying if Small Island Developing States (SIDS) cannot access the fund, “they will be doomed.”

Makurita Baaro, Ambassador to the UN for Kiribati, listed the consequences of global warming in her country, including sea level rise, increased flooding, extreme coastal erosion and receding shore lines, contaminated drinking water and displacement of communities. She noted limited technical capacity to deal with these impacts, and said the government has developed extensive programmes to: prioritize education and acquisition of marketable skills; facilitate overseas employment; and negotiate permanent emigration opportunities in the event of catastrophic sea-level rise.

Hui-Chen Chien, Taiwan Environmental Protection Administration, presented on Taiwan’s policies to combat climate change through adaptation and mitigation strategies, and emphasized the need for developing comprehensive legislative strategies. As major policies, she highlighted voluntary emission reduction incentives, improved energy efficiency, and renewable energy technology development, saying these can effect a substantial decrease in carbon emissions.

Robert Yie-Zu Hu, ITRI, shared on recent public sector projects on green industry technologies, including: installation of one million solar roof panels by 2030 in Taiwan; printed Copper Indium Gallium Selenide (CIGS) Solar Cell technology; and exchanging all traffic lights and road signals in Taiwan with LED light applications. He said these application will save approximately 2.47 GWh in electricity and reduce 151.5 thousand tonnes of CO2 emissions annually.

Graham Watson, European Parliament, said that while energy use accounts for over a quarter of all global carbon emission, this amount could be reduced to zero with political will. He urged switching from coal and gas to renewable energy technologies in order to save countries like SIDS.

Takashi Hongo, Mitsui Global Strategic Studies Institute, presented on climate change mitigation and adaptation for Pacific Island countries. He reported on the barriers to new technology expansion, citing: high initial costs; operation and maintenance; and access to low-cost financing. As solutions to these barriers, he identified standardization of technologies and international cooperation; and accessing the GCF, including through utilizing multilateral and local banks.

In the ensuing discussion, participants commented on migration as a solution for SIDS, and harnessing the potential of sunlight as a source of power generation. Participants called for appropriate and affordable strategies to limit the impacts of climate change, and Finikaso stressed that relocation would only be considered as a last resort.

The launch of the UNEP Adaptation Gap Report was moderated by Keith Alverson, UNEP. Ibrahim Thiaw, Deputy Director, UNEP, noted that the report aims to identify adaptation needs and realities on the ground, and focuses on funding, technology and knowledge gaps in developing countries. He noted other gaps not identified by the report including capacity, governance, and the interrelation between the gaps, urging further work on these in future.

Anne Olhoff, UNEP DTU Partnership, provided an overview of the UNEP Adaptation Gap Report, stressing that estimating the adaptation gap is far more challenging than calculating the emissions gap. She underscored the large differences in potential for reducing the risks and impacts of climate change, now and in the near term across countries and regions.

Florent Baarsch, Climate Analytics, spoke on the means to bridge the adaptation cost. He highlighted the Report considered both 2˚C and 4˚C temperature rise scenarios and used a combination of top-down and bottom-up approaches. He noted that the discrepancies between the World Bank figures of US$70-100 million for adaptation, and UNEP’s figures of up to US$300 million are due to factors such as those considered by temperature-rise scenarios.

Barbara Buchner, Climate Policy Initiative, provided a closer look at current adaptation finance flows. Buchner underscored that development finance institutions contribute the bulk of adaptation finance, noting that climate funds commitments have increased significantly and that the Green Climate Fund is expected to contribute to this trend in the coming years. She reported that more than half of bilateral adaptation-related activities target multiple environmental objectives, including mitigation, biodiversity and desertification.

Fatima Denton, ACPC, underscored that it is equally important to contextualize the gap, noting that the 2˚C scenario is the least evil but far from ideal, as it still involves important impacts in many regions. Denton said that enhancing knowledge is important to enable institutions to play their role, with a special focus on informal institutions.  She highlighted infrastructure and governance to address future challenges.

Richard Klein, SEI, highlighted a mismatch in the identification of needs and the actual finances available for specific sectors, querying whether the problem is the lack of technologies or the inability for these sectors to access them.

Youssef Nassef, UNFCCC Secretariat, highlighted the need to consider national risk appetites, and he emphasized the need for a qualitative goal or process, and outcome indicators in order to better determine national adaptation pathways.

Anil Markandya, Basque Centre for Climate Change, stressed the time dimension of the gap, noting that uncertainty increases over time. Markandya highlighted, inter alia the need to: focus on the implications of the gap rather than on the gap per se; and link climate policy and programmes to sustainable development goals.

In the discussion, participants considered, inter alia: the inclusion of a public component when considering the knowledge gap; the calculation of the gap figures in terms of adaptation actions; and the need for a private-sector investment assessment.