Dec 282016

Lead envoy of Least Developed Countries bloc and chief advisor assess whether the COP22 talks last month offer hope dangerous warming will be stopped

(Pic: UNFCCC/Flickr)

(Pic: UNFCCC/Flickr)

By Tosi Mpanu-Mpanu and Manjeet Dhakal

The Paris Agreement entering into force in record time, just eleven months after its adoption, framed the Marrakech Climate Conference.

Resource-constrained and vulnerable countries like ours – the least developed countries – do not have the luxury of time to continue negotiations and implementation at a slow pace.

Climate change related events are already causing loss of life and property, with accelerating impacts at home, affecting our fellow delegates between each subsequent round of climate talks.

We looked to Marrakech to give implementation momentum and to ensure that global businesses and political leaders remain engaged and willing to contribute in the fight against climate change and to fully implement the Paris Agreement.

The climate talks made progress on several issues important to the least developed countries (LDCs).

One of those is capacity building – helping to ensure that vulnerable countries have the institutional capacity to implement the Paris Agreement and mobilise actions at the country level.

The Paris Committee on Capacity Building (PCCB) established in Paris is now operational and its first meeting in May next year should be able to make substantive progress to start implementing its activities planned for 2016-2020.

Marrakech was also able to lay the foundation for the major international work stream related to loss and damage. 

Even if we limit warming to 1.5C, we know that our people will be dealing with the impacts of climate change that go beyond their ability to adapt.

Therefore, having a strong international framework is essential to ensuring that there are adequate resources and capacities available to deal with these problems.

This was a very hard fought element of the Paris Agreement, and now the institutional basis needs to be built so that this becomes more than words on paper.

Marrakech approved the indicative framework for activities on loss and damage for the next five years and reached agreement on a regular review of the Warsaw International Loss and Damage mechanism to further enhance and strengthen it.


The “Marrakech action proclamation for our climate and sustainable development,” endorsed at the climate talks, sets the tone for Paris Agreement implementation.

The proclamation that is inspirational highlights the importance of moving forward as a united global community in urgently addressing climate change, calling for solidarity amongst all to mobilise efforts and resources towards implementation and actions.

Beside formal negotiations, the Marrakech conference saw key concrete outcomes that included a number of ambitious initiatives, bringing together diverse stakeholders with the aim to increase climate action before 2020.

The ‘Marrakech partnership for global climate action‘ aims to catalyse and support climate action before 2020 through the joint effort of government and non-government initiatives and by increasing flows of finance, technology and capacity building.

There is much to be done through scaling up support and investment in climate solutions before 2020 to lay a foundation to swiftly move towards post-2020 actions.

Vulnerable countries also launched ambitious initiatives during the climate talks.

The Global Partnership on Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency brings together five regional renewable energy and energy efficiency initiatives from Africa, small island developing states (SIDS) and least developed countries (LDCs), as well as collaboration with central American countries.

The Partnership aims to bring renewable energy to 1.3 billion people who currently lack adequate access to energy.


The LDC Renewable energy and energy efficiency initiative (REEEI) for Sustainable Development, also launched in Marrakech, is part of that partnership.

It aims to boost renewable energy in LDCs while promoting energy efficiency, recognising the crucial role that energy plays in rural development, industrialisation and the provision of services.

A number of LDCs who are part of the Climate Vulnerable Forum (CVF) have also committed to 100 percent domestic renewable energy production by 2050, taking into consideration national circumstances and working together to end energy poverty and protect water and food security.

The decision in Marrakech calling for an acceleration of the work on development of the rule-set of the Paris Agreement is certainly a positive move.

Unfortunately, however, this does ensure the finalisation of work in developing the rule-set for implementation of the Paris Agreement next year, as called by LDCs.

The Marrakech decision relating to the implementation of the Paris Agreement agrees to review progress on the implementation of the work programme under the Paris Agreement in 2017 and finalise the rule-set by COP24 in 2018.

LDCs were of a view that among further work needed in the rule-making process, some work strands can be completed sooner than others.

Nevertheless, the Marrakech decisions have now stalled the final decision making of all the rule-making activities until the end of 2018.

Slow progress

The negotiations since Paris have still not entered the intensive technical discussion mode on a number of issues that were mandated by the Paris outcome. This needs to happen with urgency and energy from the next sessions in 2017 for the full Paris rule-set to be adopted in 2018.

Unfortunately Marrakesh dealt mainly with procedural issues aimed at mapping out a work programme in 2017 for different elements of the rule-set.

Whether it was about defining the nature of countries’ future nationally determined contributions (NDCs) – containing action plans and emission reduction pledges that have to be communicated every five years – or designing the architecture of the transparency and accounting system – so that we all know what each country is doing with equal clarity, the talks moved slowly.

This is hardly the result that one would have expected after a year of intense exchanges of views on these matters.  It is very disappointing that the only result is one calling for further submissions and schedule of workshops.

Such outcomes are very difficult to communicate to people back home who are eagerly waiting to see progress on implementation and actions.

Mobilising finance to assist vulnerable countries with adapting to climate change impacts is the key enabler for promoting implementation and action. Climate finance was high on the agenda in Marrakech, as we expected.

While most developing countries have also submitted plans to limit their emissions in their intended or final NDCs under the Paris Agreement, many have also noted the need for support in order to carry out their commitments.

Some preliminary estimates of the total amount of finance required for developing countries to implement their NDCs exceed $4 trillion USD. Given that only half of developing countries provided estimated costs in their NDCs, the real figure is likely to be much higher.

All this stresses the urgency of NDC implementation and that finance is key to unlocking the much greater ambition required to limit temperature increase to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels and to foster climate resilience and low carbon development.

Marrakech should have reached a milestone in building further clarity on the roadmap for reaching the US$100 billion goal for annual climate finance and scaling up the mobilisation of support before and after 2020.

But COP22 was not able make concrete decisions on finance matters and agreed only to continue the discussions in further subsequent sessions and workshops.

The outcome from the Marrakech did not get to the point of further clarifying the methodologies on how developed countries provided their roadmap on how to reach the $100 billion, nor did it initiate a discussion on how to set a new goal prior to 2025 based which was a mandate from Paris.

The roadmap that developed countries launched in October 2016 shows that there is a great imbalance between adaptation and mitigation finance- even with a pledge to double adaptation finance by 2020 it will be only represent 20% of total climate finance.

Still, we saw a ray of hope on the sidelines of the negotiations, when the Green Climate Fund (GCF) announced it will fund two LDCs (Liberia and Nepal) to prepare their medium and long term adaptation plans (NAPs) through the fund’s new and expedited procedure – the first countries to receive such support.

Also we are grateful for recent pledge made to the LDC Fund that will be used to finance projects that were already submitted.

In LDC Fund, still there are additional 35 projects, worth USD 231.4 million, that are technically cleared and waiting for support have yet to be funded. We look forward for additional contributions for the full implementation of short term (NAPA) and longer term (NAPs) adaptation needs.

1.5 to stay alive

Science tells us that beyond temperature increases of 1.5C, the future of our planet stands on increasingly thin ice. It is imperative for communities across the world that governments take seriously the legally binding long-term 1.5°C temperature limit in the Paris Agreement.

We heard many, including northern non-governmental organisations, describe this as an “aspirational goal”. It is not.

The Paris Agreement is legally binding, and its long-term temperature goal binds all countries to continually update the ambition of their actions to ultimately meet this goal.

The necessary, upward spiralling of actions and commitments to cut emissions to zero by around mid-century is both fair and proportionate to the challenge rising before us. It is vital and not something that can be merely seen as aspirational.

While international political progress over the past year has been significant, countries are still far from implementing actions on the scale required to steer the planet away from dangerous climate change and achieve the goals that have been set under the Paris Agreement.

For developing countries, and in particular the LDCs, it is important to continue working towards a strong and fair international response to climate change, to protect poor and vulnerable communities across the world and safeguard the planet for future generations.

Even though 2018 will be the time for final decision making to endorse the remaining work on finalising the Paris Agreement rule-set, there is much that can and needs be done in 2017.

The workshops and roundtables scheduled throughout 2017 and two formal negotiating sessions must achieve more than calling for the next round of meetings and submissions.

It is very important that as much as possible is done in 2017, as 2018 will be very busy with the Facilitative Dialogue which is focused on the aggregate level of mitigation ambition being put forward by governments in relation to the 1.5C limit in the Paris Agreement, supported by a special-purpose IPCC report on 1.5C, due in September of that year.

The LDC Group at the UN climate change negotiations will be led by Ethiopia for the year 2017 and 2018. Ethiopia has led by example with mobilisation of tremendous efforts at home in promoting climate action and particularly initiatives on renewable energy.

The LDC Group will continue to engage in future subsequent negotiating sessions in a constructive manner and leading by example.

We do not have the luxury of time to continue negotiations without concrete outcomes and we look forward to these outcomes serving the expectations of the poor and vulnerable back home.

LDCs returned home from Marrakech with mixed feelings, but with a confident expectation that the international process will steer towards recognising the urgency of climate action for the planet and its people.

Tosi Mpanu-Mpanu is the Chair of the the least developed countries (LDCs) Group at UN Climate Change negotiations.  Manjeet Dhakal is Advisor to the Chair of the LDC Group

Continue reading »

Dec 232015

The article was published on the Nagarik daily (23 Dec, 2015)

कोपनहेगन सम्मेलनपश्चात धर्मराएको संयुक्त राष्ट्र संघीय वार्ता प्रक्रियामा छ वर्षपश्चात नयाँ आयाम देखापरेको छ । संयुक्त राष्ट्र संघअन्तर्गत भइरहेका छलफलबाट पृथ्वीमा भइरहेको तापक्रम वृद्धि र त्यसका असर समाधान गर्ने उपाय जटिल बन्दै गइरहेको अवस्थामा पेरिस सम्मेलनले सकारात्मक आशा जगाएको छ । यसमा आयोजक राष्ट्र फ्रान्सले अपनाएको पारदर्शी नीति र कूटनीतिक परिपक्वतालाई सराहना गर्नैपर्छ । यसो भनिरहँदा यो सहमति आफँैमा पूर्ण भने छैन । यसमा व्याख्या गरिएका अवधारणा र नियमित गर्नुपर्ने केही प्रावधानको कार्यान्वयनले नै यो सहमतिको प्रभावकारिता या सफलता मापन गर्नेछन् । त्यसैले पेरिस कति सफल रह्यो भन्ने विषय भविष्यमा विश्लेषण गर्दै जानुपर्छ ।

तापक्रम वृद्धिमा नियन्त्रण

औद्योगिकीकरणपश्चात वायुमण्डलमा हरित गृह ग्यासको अधिक उत्सर्जन भएकाले हालसम्म पृथ्वीको औसत तापक्रम लगभग ०.८५ डिग्री सेल्सियसले वृद्धि भइसकेको छ । बढ्दो तापक्रमलाई २ डिग्री सेल्सियसभन्दा कममा सीमित गर्न यसअघि सहमति भएको भए तापनि यस पटक सो सहमतिबाट अघि बढ्दै तापक्रम वृद्धिलाई २ डिग्रीभन्दा निकै कम गरी १.५ डिग्री सेल्सियससम्ममा सीमित गर्न राष्ट्र सहमत भएका छन् । यसका लागि विकसित राष्ट्रहरुको अग्रसरतामा बाँकी सम्पूर्ण राष्ट्रले हरित गृह ग्यास उत्सर्जन कम गर्ने योजना नियमितरूपमा बुझाउँदै जानुपर्नेछ । यसरी बुझाइएको योजनाहरुको प्रभावकारिताका साथै विकासोन्मुख देशहरुले प्राप्त गर्ने सहयोगको अवस्थाबारे प्रत्येक पाँच वर्षमा समीक्षा गरी थप अग्रसरता लिन सूचित गरिने विषय पेरिस सहमतिका प्रावधानमा उल्लेख छ ।

को बढी जिम्मेवार ?

नयाँ सहमतिमा जानका लागि पेरिस सम्मेलनले झेल्नुपरेको अर्को जटिल विषय भनेको विकसित र रत गतिमा विकास भइरहेका विकासोन्मुख देशमध्ये कसले कति जिम्मेवारी लिने भन्ने थियो । हाल भारत र चीन सबैभन्दा अधिक हरित गृह उत्सर्जन गर्ने देशहरुको सूचीमा अग्रस्थानमा पर्छन् । वर्तमान अवस्थामा विकसित देशहरुले भन्दा विकासोन्मुख देशहरुले गर्ने कुल हरित गृह ग्यास उत्सर्जन धेरै छ । तर पनि विगतमा भएको उत्सर्जनको विश्लेषण गर्ने हो भने अझै पनि विकसित देशहरु धेरै जिम्मेवार रहेको अवस्था छ । Continue reading »

Dec 182015

Radio interview on Nepal FM Network
0700 hrs 18 December 2015

Live interview by Subash Kathidawada of Nepal FM Network to analysis the outcome of the Paris Climate Change Conference, the Paris Agreement and Nepal context.

 Posted by on December 18, 2015 at 12:04 pm
Dec 132015

Radio interview on SBS Australia
13 December 2015

पेरिस सम्झौता – नेपालको लागि राम्रो?
The Paris agreement has been described as a historical achievement by the global community in reducing the impacts of climate change. Manjeet Dhakal was one of the members of the Nepali team involved in negotiations at the conference and he spoke …

(जलवायु परिवर्तन सम्बन्धि राष्ट्रसंघिय सम्मेलनमा सहभागी नेपाली बार्ता टोलिका सदस्य मन्जीत ढकाल उक्त एतिहासिक भनिएको सम्झौता बाट नेपाललाई हुनसक्ने फाइदा बारे बताउंदै। )

 Posted by on December 13, 2015 at 12:11 pm
Dec 252014
The article was published on the Nagarik daily (25 Dec, 2014) 

विकासको होडमा खनिज इन्धनको बढ्दो प्रयोग र वातावरणमा ह्रास पुर्‍याउने अन्य गतिविधिका कारण हरितगृह ग्यासको अत्यधिक उत्सर्जन हुनपुगेको छ। यसबाट पृथ्वीको औसत तापक्रममा बृद्धि भइरहेको वैज्ञानिक तथ्य धेरैअघि नै सार्वजनिक भइसकेको हो। हरितगृह ग्यासको उत्सर्जनमा कमी ल्याउन र खाद्यसुरक्षालाई दृष्टिगत गर्दै आर्थिक विकासलाई दिगो बनाइराख्ने उद्देश्यले सन् १९९२ मा संयुक्त राष्ट्र संघीय जलवायु परिवर्तनसम्बन्धी खाका महासन्धीमा हस्ताक्षर गरियो। महासन्धीमा उल्लेख भएअनुसार हरितगृह ग्यासको उत्पादन कटौती गर्ने र विकासोन्मुख राष्ट्रहरूलाई आर्थिक तथा प्राविधिक सहयोग गर्ने जिम्मेवारी प्रमुखरूपमा विकसित राष्ट्रहरूको हुने व्यवस्था छ।

Screen Shot 2014-12-25 at 12.12.04 PM
सन् १९९२ को खाका महासन्धी आफैमा बाध्यकारी नहुने भएकाले यसैमा उल्लेख भएअनुसार, पछि हुने पक्ष राष्ट्रको सम्मेलनले आवश्यक बाध्यात्मक सम्झौता, आर्थिक र प्राविधिक सहयोग जुटाउन संयन्त्र स्थापना गर्ने व्यवस्था गरिएको थियो। सोहीअनुरूप सन् १९९७ मा विकसित राष्ट्रलाई हरितगृह ग्यास उत्सर्जन कटौती गर्न बाध्य पार्ने क्योटो प्रोटोकल र सन् २०१० को क्यान्कुन सम्मेलनबाट आर्थिक र प्राविधिक संयन्त्र स्थापना गरियो।

क्मजोर कार्यान्वयन
आवश्यक व्यवस्था हुदाँहुदै पनि सम्मेलनले आशातीत सफलता प्राप्त गर्ननसकेको यथार्थ हाम्रो सामु छर्लंग छ। क्योटो प्रोटोकलमा पहिले अमेरिकाले सहमति जनाए पनि उसको संसद्ले यस बाध्यात्मक सन्धीलाई अनुमोदन गरेन। त्यसताकाको प्रमुख हरितगृह ग्यास उत्सर्जन गर्ने राष्ट्र अमेरिकाले अनुमोदन नगरेसँगै यसको प्रभावकारितामा प्रश्न उठ्न सुरु भइसकेको थियो। फलस्वरुप, सन् २०१२ मा क्यानडाले यस प्रोटोकलबाट हात झिक्नुका साथै, अस्टे्रलिया, जापान र रसियाले थप प्रतिबद्धता गर्नबाट पछि हटे। यसपछि प्रोटोकलको प्रभावकारिता अत्यन्त कम हुनगयो।

सन् २०१० मा स्थापना भएका आर्थिक र प्रविधि संयन्त्रहरू हालसम्म पनि व्यवस्थापकीय कार्यमा अल्झिनाले सोचेअनुरूप सफलता प्राप्त गर्न सकेनन्। यस वर्षमात्र हरित जलवायु कोषमा झण्डै १० बिलियन अमेरिकी डलर Continue reading »

Dec 162014

This Article was published on Haka Haki Mangshir issue

राजधानीको प्रदूषण नियन्त्रण गर्न अहिलेसम्म भएका पहल पर्याप्त छैनन् । यसका साथै भएका कार्यक्रम तथा नीति पनि समन्वय र अनुगमनको अभावमा उपलब्धिमूलक हुन सकिरहेका छैनन् ।

एउटा स्वस्थ्य मानिसले औसत प्रतिमिनेट १२ पटकसम्म सास फेर्छ । त्यसक्रममा उसले लगभग ६ लिटर हावा प्रयोग गर्छ । यसबाट अनुमान गर्न सकिन्छ, बाँच्नका लागि हावा कति आवश्यक छ ? भनिन्छ, खाना नखाई मानिस तीन हप्तासम्म र पानी नपिइ २–३ दिनसम्म बाँच्न सक्छ । तर, हावाबिना ३ मिनेटभन्दा बढी बाँच्न गाह्रो हुन्छ ।

हामीले सास फेर्ने हावामा सामान्य आँखाले देख्न सकिने र नसकिने धुलोका अनेकन कण हुन्छन् । ती मध्ये केही हानिकारक हुन्छन् त केही असर नगर्ने किसिमका पनि हुन्छन् । हावामा यसरी हानिकारक धुलोका कणको मिसावट भई हुने वायु प्रदूषणबाट राजधानी काठमाडौंै अछुतो नरहेको सर्वविदितै छ । काठमाडौंैमा गरिएका अध्ययन मनन गर्दा, यहाँ विशेषगरी रासायनिक वा अन्य किसिमका प्रदूषणभन्दा पनि सडक, सवारी र कलकारखानाबाट निस्कने धुवाँ र धुलोको समस्या टड्कारो देखिन्छ ।

सडक धुलाम्ये भएको बेला होस् या कुनै कलकाखानाबाट निस्कने धुवाँको मुस्लो, हामी ‘ओहो, कति धेरै प्रदूषित भएको’ भन्छौं । Continue reading »

Jul 292014

The article was published on the Nagarik daily (29 July, 2014)

हरेक वर्षझैं, यस आर्थिक वर्षको बजेट पनि संसदमा प्रस्तुत भयो। बजेट प्रस्तुतिसँगै यसका सवल तथा कमजोर पक्षबारे ससंदभित्र र बाहिर अनेकन छलफल तथा टीकाटिप्पणी भए। नवीकरणीय ऊर्जाका केही पक्षमा बाहेक वातावरणीय व्यवस्थापनका अन्य महत्वपूर्ण पक्षले बजेटमा साथै अधिकांश छलफलमा यथोचित स्थान पाएनन्।

विकास निर्माणका योजना तर्जुमा गर्दा होस् वा कार्यान्वयन गर्दा, वातावरणीय पक्षहरु उत्तिकै महत्वपूर्ण हुन्छन्। वातावरणीय पक्षहरुलाई ख्याल नगरी बनाइने योजना दूरगामी हँुदैनन् र यसले दिगो विकासको लक्ष्यसमेत अवलम्बन गर्न सक्तैन। विकास निर्माणका कार्यक्रम कार्यान्वयन गर्ने क्रममा वातावरणीय पक्षहरुबारे छलफल गर्नु भनेको विकास विरोधी नभई ती कार्यक्रमलाई दिगो र जनमुखी बनाउने प्रयासका रूपमा बुझ्नुपर्छ।

वातावरणीय विनासले आर्थिक क्षेत्रलाई के कति हदसम्म असर गर्न सक्छ भनेर अनेकौं अध्ययनमा प्रकाश पारेको छ। सन् २००९ मा नेपाल स्वास्थ्य अध्ययन परिषद्ले गरेको अध्ययनअनुसार नेपालमा वातावरणीय प्रदूषणका कारण वार्षिक १९२६ बालबालिकाको अकालमै मृत्यु हुने गरेको छ। त्यस्तै, विश्व बैङ्कमार्फत सन् २०१२ मा भएकोे अर्को अध्ययनअनुसार, काठमाडांै र ललितपुरमा वायु प्रदूषणको स्तर राष्ट्रिय मापदण्डअनुसार मात्रै हुने हो भने पनि मात्र वार्षिक लगभग ३३ अरब रुपियाँसम्म बचत गर्न सकिन्छ। साथै, स्वच्छ ऊर्जा नेपालले केही समयअघि गरेको अध्ययन अनुसार काठमाडांैमा मात्र हावामा भएका धुलोका कणहरुको मात्रा अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय मापदण्डअनुसार हुने हो भने १ लाख ५० हजार जति बालबालिका र वृद्धलाई लाग्ने श्वास/प्रश्वाससम्बन्धी रोगबाट बचाउन सकिन्छ।

प्रस्तुत बजेटमा मानव स्वास्थ्य साथै सम्पूर्ण आर्थिक क्षेत्रलाई समेत गम्भीर असर पुर्‍याउने वातावरण विनासका अधिकांश विषयबारे यथोचित सम्बोधन नगरिएको पाइयो। वायु प्रदूषण, फोहोरमैला व्यवस्थापन जस्ता विषयहरुमा बजेट मौन छ। लाग्छ, हाम्रा लागि यी समस्या नै होइनन्। आंशिकरूपमा बजेटले नविीकरणीय ऊर्जा, वन विनास र अन्य केही विषयबारे समेट्न खोजेको देखिन्छ। साथै, बजेटले तीन वर्षभित्रमा प्रत्येक घरलाई धुवाँमुक्त उज्यालो घर बनाउने संकल्प लिएको छ। यो कार्यक्रम स्वागतयोग्य भए पनि चुनौतीपूर्ण छ। यसै कार्यक्रमअन्तर्गत १ लाख २५ हजार सौर्य विद्युत् प्रणाली, ८ लाख सुधारिएको चुलो, १ हजार सौर्य कुकर, २०० सौर्य सिँचाइ पम्प र ५० हजार घरायसी वायोग्याँस प्लान्ट प्रबर्द्धन गर्ने भनिएको छ। कार्यान्वयन पक्ष हेर्ने हो भने प्रश्न उठ्छ, के नेपालका सबै घरलाई धुवाँमुक्त र उज्यालो बनाउन उल्लिखित योजना पर्याप्त छन् त?

काठमाडौं जस्ता सहरलाई कसरी व्यवस्थित गर्न सकिन्छ भनेर छुट्टै मन्त्रालयसमेत स्थापना भयो, अनेकौं अध्ययन भए र प्रतिवेदनसमेत तयार पारिए। काठमाडांैकै लागि भनेर काठमाडौँ उपत्यका विकास प्राधिकरणसमेत स्थापना गरियो। तर समस्या भने जहाँको त्यहीँ छ। यसका लागि महानगरपालिकाको मात्र उदाहरण लिने हो भने पनि समस्या छर्लङ्ग हुन्छ। यहाँको फोहोर मैला व्यवस्थापनमा मात्र वार्षिक लगभग ४ करोड भन्दा बढी खर्च हुन्छ। Continue reading »

Jan 222014

The article was published on the Nagarik News (22 Jan, 2014)

विश्व वातावरण संरक्षण र दिगो विकासका लागि भएका पहलमध्ये मुख्यतः सन् १९९२ मा ब्राजिलको रियो दि जेनिरियोमा भएको पृथ्वी सम्मेलनबाट पारित जलवायु परिवर्तनसम्बन्धी संयुक्त राष्ट्रसंघीय खाका महासन्धिको मुख्य उद्देश्य विश्व उष्णीकरणमा प्रमुख भूमिका रहेको मानव सृजित हरित गृह ग्यास (अर्थात् समग्रमा कार्बन) उत्सर्जनमा कटौती गर्नु थियो।

महासन्धिमा उल्लेख भएअनुसार हरित गृह ग्यासको उत्सर्जन घटाउने प्रमुख जिम्मेवारी विकसित राष्ट्रहरुको हुनेछ भने विकासोन्मुख राष्ट्रहरुका हकमा भने अर्थ र प्रविधि सहयोग प्राप्त गरेको खण्डमा मात्र यस्ता उत्सर्जन घटाउने क्रियाकलापमा संलग्न हुनेछन् भनिएको छ। महासन्धिमा सिद्धान्ततः कार्वन उत्सर्जन घटाउने भनिए तापनि कसले र कति मात्रामा घटाउने भन्नेबारे पछि हुने सहमतिहरुमा उल्लेख हुने भनिएको थियो। फलस्वरूप सन् १९९७ मा जापानको क्योटो सहरमा भएको महासन्धिका पक्ष राष्ट्रहरुको तेस्रो सम्मेलनमा क्योटो प्रोटोकल पारित भयो। यो अनुमोदन गरेका विकसित राष्ट्रले पहिलो प्रतिबद्धता अवधि अनुरूप सन् २००८ देखि २०१२ सम्ममा सन् १९९० मा उनीहरुले गरेकोे उत्सर्जनभन्दा औसत५ प्रतिशतले कमी ल्याउने प्रतिबद्धता जनाएका थिए। गत वर्ष कतारको दोहामा भएको महासन्धिका पक्ष राष्ट्रहरुको अठारौं सम्मेलनले यो प्रोटोकोलका प्रावधानलाई अर्को आठ वर्षका लागि थप गर्दै दोस्रो प्रतिबद्धता अवधिमा सन् २०१३ देखि २०२० सम्म ती राष्ट्रले औसत् १८ प्रतिशतले कार्वन उत्सर्जन घटाउनुपर्ने निर्णय गर्‍यो।

क्योटो प्रोटोकलका प्रावधान केही ठीक रहे तापनि यसले अधिकतम् कार्वन उत्सर्जन गर्ने राष्ट्रहरुलाई समेट्न नसक्नु, समग्रमा कार्वन उत्सर्जन घटाउन खासै योगदान नहुनु र उत्सर्जन घटाउने प्रतिबद्धता गरेका राष्ट्रले प्रतिबद्धता पूरा गर्न बाध्यकारी प्रावधान नहुनु यसका कमजोरी रहे। फलस्वरूप दोस्रो प्रतिबद्धता अवधिमा उत्सर्जन अलि बढी प्रतिशतले घटाउने भनिए तापनि त्यसको खासै अर्थ रहेन। तत्कालीन अवस्थामा अधिकतम् उत्सर्जन गर्ने राष्ट्र जस्तै– अमेरिकाले क्योटो प्रोटोकल कहिल्यै अनुमोदन गरेन भने हाल अधिकतम् उत्सर्जन गर्ने चीन र भारत जस्ता द्रुत गतिमा विकास भइरहेका राष्ट्र यो प्रोटोकलको दायरामा पर्दैनन्। यो प्रोटोकलको यस्तो असफलतासँगं गत वर्ष जापान, रुस र क्यानडाले समेत यसबाट हात झिकेका छन्। यी क्रियाकलापको प्रत्यक्ष असर कार्वनको बजारमा देखियो जुन लगभग तहसनहस स्थितिमा छ।

क्योटो प्रोटोकलका यिनै कमजोरी सम्ााधान गर्दै महासन्धिको उद्देश्य पूर्णरूपमा पालना गर्ने हेतुले सन् २०११ म्ाा दक्षिण अफ्रिकाको डर्वान सहरमा भएको सम्मेलनबाट नयाँ सहमतिका लागि नयाँ थालनी गरियो। जसअनुरूप सन् २०१५ मा हुने महासन्धिका पक्ष राष्ट्रहरुको २१ औं सम्मेलनले नयाँ सहमति गरी त्यसको कार्यान्वयन सन् २०२० बाट लागु हुने निर्णय गरियो। नयाँ हुने भनिएको सहमति सम्पूर्ण राष्ट्रलाई मान्य हुनेछ भनिए तापनि Continue reading »

Apr 092013

This article was published on The Republica (9 April, 2013) 

A number of western news wires and climate pundits seem to be euphoric over the ‘declaration’ of some of the poorest countries to cut emissions of Green House Gases to tackle runaway climate change. We will soon know whether the group of least developed countries (LDCs) actually made the commitment, and if it is worth such a wide coverage, but let us first examine whether such a move from the LDCs will have any significance.

Scientific evidences suggest that the world is on the path to becoming 4 °C warmer within this century. It has already been verified that warming above 1.5 °C will cause serious threats to the development and even survival of communities in the most underprivileged parts of the world. A recent report by World Bank said, “A world in which warming reaches 4°C above preindustrial levels would be one of unprecedented heat waves, severe drought, and major floods in many regions, with serious impacts on human systems, ecosystems, and associated services.” But developed countries, which are primarily responsible for, and have the ability to avert, this catastrophe, remain nonchalant.

Twenty plus years have passed since negotiations started among the countries under United Nations to find ways to keep the temperatures rise under safe limits so as to stabilize the climate. In recent years, with countries like China, Brazil, South Africa and India catching up with the United States and European countries not only in economic development but also in Green House Gas emission, a debate over who should take the lead in reducing emissions has been started. The negotiating parties are at loggerheads, with developed countries unwilling to take actions without emerging economies agreeing to binding emission cuts, while emerging economies cite the historical responsibility of developed countries. Forced to remain in the sidelines, LDCs and small island developing states (SIDS) urged developing nations to take note of the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities (CBDR-RC) acknowledged in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

The 49 LDCs representing 12 percent of the world’s population are responsible for only four percent of global emissions, but are the most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. Continue reading »

Feb 092013

Just imagine, “yours school days specially when classes were off, the first day you ride on bicycle or the first day you went for a movie, or the first time you proposed someone at school, at school, hmm wasn’t it too early”.

Really, time flies so fast when it shouldn’t. We only remember the best parts of it and the exceptionally bad ones, if any. Remembering those astonishing memories, it’s hard to believe how long it has been and how time flies. Someone said, “Life is half spent before one knows what it is.”

Time passes by so quickly…change happens all around us everyday weather we like it or not. Enjoy the moment while you can, one day it will just be another memory. 

Sometime we feel like it was just, the day before yesterday that happened, but it’s already a year and more. It was at the beginning of 2003, I came to know bout Clean Energy Nepal and started my involvement as a volunteer and it has already been more that ten years by now.

I have witness revolutionary changes during this period at every stage. At the political level of the country, a beginning of new governing system to the almost failed Constitutional assembly. Retreating of cheap immigrant labor to gulf countries and young inventive minds to western countries are increasing. We passed few decades, framing the structural governing process and there are countries in this world which has every kind of system with every designated individual at the top of power and even they are categorized as developed countries. So is it really the governing systems or also the mind set of the people, your leaders and your citizen that makes the country prosperous. We could have different thought on it?

At my own, I have closely observed a gradual change in color of hair and fairy skin of my parents in these recent years, I could understand their expectation for me, my career and future, which seems normal as every parent does. As time passes, we are loosing contact with many of those school friends and we have limited to a few numbers of colleagues and on the other side there are increasing number of professional circle. Continue reading »