1
00:00:00,480 --> 00:00:03,600
Speaker 1: This is Cobald Barbnagrie and you're listening to Switched on

2
00:00:03,960 --> 00:00:07,600
Speaker 1: the podcast brought to you by Bloomberg NIAF. Global climate

3
00:00:07,640 --> 00:00:11,480
Speaker 1: negotiations are approaching a critical juncture as countries prepare to

4
00:00:11,520 --> 00:00:14,840
Speaker 1: meet in Brazil for COP thirty, ten years after the

5
00:00:14,880 --> 00:00:17,880
Speaker 1: Paris Agreement first set the world on a shared path

6
00:00:18,000 --> 00:00:22,200
Speaker 1: towards net zero, but that momentum has slowed. Only around

7
00:00:22,200 --> 00:00:25,439
Speaker 1: a third of nations have submitted new pledges, and together

8
00:00:25,760 --> 00:00:28,479
Speaker 1: they still point to roughly two point seven degrees of

9
00:00:28,520 --> 00:00:33,400
Speaker 1: warming by centuries and political shifts, economic pressures, and the

10
00:00:33,520 --> 00:00:37,920
Speaker 1: absence of US leadership have further tested both ambition and resolve,

11
00:00:38,240 --> 00:00:42,680
Speaker 1: leaving the global process more fragmented than before. Still, there

12
00:00:42,680 --> 00:00:46,880
Speaker 1: are reasons for cautious optimism, with China announcing its first

13
00:00:47,000 --> 00:00:51,280
Speaker 1: absolute emissions target, the EU edging toward a new twenty

14
00:00:51,280 --> 00:00:55,440
Speaker 1: thirty five goal, and Brazil working to revive progress on

15
00:00:55,560 --> 00:00:59,600
Speaker 1: carbon markets and renewables. As delegates gather in Balam, the

16
00:00:59,680 --> 00:01:02,400
Speaker 1: question is whether COP thirty can restore the sense of

17
00:01:02,400 --> 00:01:06,720
Speaker 1: collective purpose that defined Paris or confirm that global unity

18
00:01:06,760 --> 00:01:10,520
Speaker 1: on climate is slipping away. On today's show, I'm joined

19
00:01:10,520 --> 00:01:14,319
Speaker 1: by Bloomberg NIF's head of Global Policy, Victoria Cumming and

20
00:01:14,520 --> 00:01:18,559
Speaker 1: Energy Transitions Associate Brinn Mary Murkley to discuss their recent

21
00:01:18,600 --> 00:01:23,440
Speaker 1: note COP thirty Climate Talks to advance a mid geopolitical turmoil.

22
00:01:23,800 --> 00:01:27,240
Speaker 1: BNF clients can find this note by heading to BNYF

23
00:01:27,360 --> 00:01:31,160
Speaker 1: go on the Bloomberg terminal ORBNF dot com, where you

24
00:01:31,200 --> 00:01:33,640
Speaker 1: can also register for a webinar coming up on the

25
00:01:33,680 --> 00:01:38,240
Speaker 1: fifth of November titled COP thirty Reality Check Which markets

26
00:01:38,240 --> 00:01:41,399
Speaker 1: have delivered on their promises. If you'd like to learn

27
00:01:41,440 --> 00:01:45,759
Speaker 1: more about how BNF approaches strategic research on the energy transition,

28
00:01:46,080 --> 00:01:50,160
Speaker 1: including developments in commodity markets, trends across different sectors, and

29
00:01:50,240 --> 00:01:53,320
Speaker 1: the cross cutting technologies shaping the future, you can find

30
00:01:53,360 --> 00:01:56,960
Speaker 1: more information on BNF dot com, and if you'd like

31
00:01:57,040 --> 00:01:59,080
Speaker 1: to speak with a member of our team about becoming

32
00:01:59,160 --> 00:02:03,760
Speaker 1: a client, email us at Sales dot BNF at Bloomberg

33
00:02:03,880 --> 00:02:07,040
Speaker 1: dot net. So let's take a closer look at how

34
00:02:07,080 --> 00:02:10,320
Speaker 1: COP thirty could shape global climate ambition and what it

35
00:02:10,360 --> 00:02:24,160
Speaker 1: will take to turn new pledges into lasting action. Vicky,

36
00:02:24,240 --> 00:02:25,120
Speaker 1: welcome to the show.

37
00:02:25,520 --> 00:02:27,720
Speaker 2: Thank you very much for having us delighted to be

38
00:02:27,800 --> 00:02:30,880
Speaker 2: here and talking about all things COP and Brinn.

39
00:02:31,240 --> 00:02:32,800
Speaker 1: Really great to have you with us as well.

40
00:02:33,200 --> 00:02:35,280
Speaker 3: Thank you, corb Ada. I'm really excited to be here

41
00:02:35,320 --> 00:02:37,600
Speaker 3: and talk about the upcoming COP thirty.

42
00:02:37,960 --> 00:02:41,400
Speaker 1: We are on the eve of COP thirty in Brazil,

43
00:02:41,600 --> 00:02:45,000
Speaker 1: which is one of the more significant COPS on the

44
00:02:45,639 --> 00:02:50,000
Speaker 1: annual rostrum of UN conventions. To start off, Vicky, can

45
00:02:50,040 --> 00:02:53,120
Speaker 1: you tell us what is a COP and what is

46
00:02:53,120 --> 00:02:55,280
Speaker 1: the significance of a COP? And first, what does that

47
00:02:55,400 --> 00:02:56,399
Speaker 1: acronym even mean?

48
00:02:57,240 --> 00:03:01,600
Speaker 2: Yes, the climate negotiations and environments on negotiations in general

49
00:03:01,720 --> 00:03:05,120
Speaker 2: really do enjoy an acronym. So when people talk about

50
00:03:05,200 --> 00:03:08,040
Speaker 2: COP in this instance, they mean the Conference of the

51
00:03:08,080 --> 00:03:12,440
Speaker 2: Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change,

52
00:03:12,480 --> 00:03:16,120
Speaker 2: which is quite a mouthful. So these are typically annual

53
00:03:16,280 --> 00:03:20,600
Speaker 2: climate summits where the two hundred or so countries and

54
00:03:20,639 --> 00:03:23,760
Speaker 2: regions that have signed up to the Framework Convention meet

55
00:03:23,960 --> 00:03:28,120
Speaker 2: to discuss how to collaborate cooperate on how to tackle

56
00:03:28,160 --> 00:03:31,520
Speaker 2: climate change. As you alluded, there are indeed multiple cops.

57
00:03:31,760 --> 00:03:34,960
Speaker 2: So there as one on biodiversity, there's one on desertification.

58
00:03:35,240 --> 00:03:37,640
Speaker 2: But generally when people talk about COP, they are talking

59
00:03:37,720 --> 00:03:41,360
Speaker 2: about the climate one and in terms of why that matters,

60
00:03:41,720 --> 00:03:44,880
Speaker 2: So the idea is that it will be more effective

61
00:03:45,080 --> 00:03:49,960
Speaker 2: and more cost effective if countries actually collaborate on tackling

62
00:03:49,960 --> 00:03:52,880
Speaker 2: climate change. So this is their opportunity to talk about

63
00:03:52,960 --> 00:03:56,840
Speaker 2: kind of what terms of multilateral action. And the idea

64
00:03:57,040 --> 00:04:00,240
Speaker 2: is that decisions that are made at COP, which as

65
00:04:00,240 --> 00:04:03,200
Speaker 2: a side note for the climate geeks among us, they

66
00:04:03,240 --> 00:04:05,680
Speaker 2: have to be done by consensus, so that means that

67
00:04:05,720 --> 00:04:08,880
Speaker 2: a decision is past provided there's not a major objection,

68
00:04:09,280 --> 00:04:13,280
Speaker 2: rather than unanimity where all parties have to actually agree

69
00:04:13,320 --> 00:04:16,240
Speaker 2: actively to a particular proposal. So the idea is that

70
00:04:16,279 --> 00:04:19,680
Speaker 2: decisions made at COP feed down into the kind of

71
00:04:19,760 --> 00:04:22,839
Speaker 2: national level policies. So one of the key topics that

72
00:04:22,839 --> 00:04:25,479
Speaker 2: we're going to be talking about is climate ambitions. That's

73
00:04:25,520 --> 00:04:29,480
Speaker 2: the ambition of these climate action pledges, and the idea

74
00:04:29,520 --> 00:04:32,760
Speaker 2: is that countries will agree a kind of overall level

75
00:04:32,760 --> 00:04:36,160
Speaker 2: ambition that will then determine how they plan to contribute

76
00:04:36,200 --> 00:04:39,560
Speaker 2: to that global effort, which then feeds down into national

77
00:04:39,640 --> 00:04:42,920
Speaker 2: level policies at a sector level, which could therefore directly

78
00:04:43,000 --> 00:04:47,760
Speaker 2: impact companies and consumers. The other aspect is that there

79
00:04:47,760 --> 00:04:51,320
Speaker 2: are also agreements made at COP that relate to actually

80
00:04:51,920 --> 00:04:55,920
Speaker 2: specific initiatives for example, around carbon markets. So one of

81
00:04:55,960 --> 00:04:58,320
Speaker 2: the big topics in the LEM this year will be

82
00:04:58,520 --> 00:05:03,440
Speaker 2: about what's called Article six, which is essentially carbon market mechanisms,

83
00:05:03,560 --> 00:05:05,839
Speaker 2: and these well some of these will be open to

84
00:05:06,240 --> 00:05:09,159
Speaker 2: companies and kind of the private sector. So the idea

85
00:05:09,200 --> 00:05:11,719
Speaker 2: is it's kind of a filter down approach, and that's

86
00:05:11,760 --> 00:05:13,920
Speaker 2: why it kind of matters for companies to keep an

87
00:05:13,920 --> 00:05:14,280
Speaker 2: eye on.

88
00:05:14,680 --> 00:05:18,240
Speaker 1: So that point about unanimity is a very important one,

89
00:05:18,240 --> 00:05:21,000
Speaker 1: which we will come back to towards the end. But

90
00:05:21,640 --> 00:05:24,440
Speaker 1: I want to just clarify. So this is the thirtieth

91
00:05:24,560 --> 00:05:27,880
Speaker 1: conference of the Parties of the UN Framework Conventional Climate

92
00:05:27,960 --> 00:05:31,200
Speaker 1: chanin So there's been thirty of these previously. Why is

93
00:05:31,320 --> 00:05:33,920
Speaker 1: this one particularly important?

94
00:05:34,160 --> 00:05:36,919
Speaker 2: So one of the key reasons why this one is

95
00:05:36,960 --> 00:05:40,680
Speaker 2: particularly important is, first of all, it marks ten years

96
00:05:40,720 --> 00:05:43,960
Speaker 2: since the Paris Agreement was reached. So you may have

97
00:05:44,040 --> 00:05:47,279
Speaker 2: heard of the Kyoto Protocol that was one of the

98
00:05:47,360 --> 00:05:50,599
Speaker 2: kind of groundbreaking climate deals agreed in the past, but

99
00:05:50,640 --> 00:05:53,560
Speaker 2: the most recent one is called the Paris Agreement, and

100
00:05:53,920 --> 00:05:55,880
Speaker 2: we've had ten years under that and one of the

101
00:05:56,279 --> 00:05:58,800
Speaker 2: key aspects of the Paris Agreement was it took a

102
00:05:58,800 --> 00:06:03,239
Speaker 2: completely different approach the Kyoto Protocol which imposed top down

103
00:06:03,320 --> 00:06:06,280
Speaker 2: kind of binding targets on what would be called developed

104
00:06:06,360 --> 00:06:10,600
Speaker 2: economies gid to. It's right absolutely that it imposed them,

105
00:06:10,720 --> 00:06:12,839
Speaker 2: not all of them actually adhered to them. But with

106
00:06:12,960 --> 00:06:16,640
Speaker 2: the Paris Agreement, it imposed all parties were meant to

107
00:06:17,080 --> 00:06:20,320
Speaker 2: commit to voluntary pledges. So they decided on how they

108
00:06:20,360 --> 00:06:23,440
Speaker 2: wanted to contribute to the overall goals of the Paris Agreement,

109
00:06:23,520 --> 00:06:27,599
Speaker 2: which are to limit the global surface temperature increase by

110
00:06:27,960 --> 00:06:30,359
Speaker 2: two degrees by the end of the century and to

111
00:06:30,960 --> 00:06:34,039
Speaker 2: make best efforts to limit global warming to one point

112
00:06:34,160 --> 00:06:36,880
Speaker 2: five degrees. One of the key aspects therefore the Paris

113
00:06:36,920 --> 00:06:40,160
Speaker 2: Agreement was this new kind of reporting cycle of countries

114
00:06:40,200 --> 00:06:43,240
Speaker 2: make pledges, then there's an assessment which is called the

115
00:06:43,240 --> 00:06:47,240
Speaker 2: global stock take of progress towards the overall Paris Agreement goals,

116
00:06:47,400 --> 00:06:51,160
Speaker 2: and then countries make more ambitious pledges. BELLM is important

117
00:06:51,279 --> 00:06:54,800
Speaker 2: because countries are meant to come with these more ambitious policies.

118
00:06:54,880 --> 00:06:57,479
Speaker 2: So it's a key test of whether the Paris Agreement

119
00:06:57,560 --> 00:07:00,960
Speaker 2: is actually being an effective mechanism. And indeed, the whole

120
00:07:01,279 --> 00:07:03,760
Speaker 2: UNF Triple C COP process.

121
00:07:03,480 --> 00:07:07,040
Speaker 1: And the last time we had this pledge process at

122
00:07:07,040 --> 00:07:09,400
Speaker 1: a COP was in Glasgow, right, I forgured the number

123
00:07:09,480 --> 00:07:11,560
Speaker 1: of that COP, but that was regarded as quite a

124
00:07:11,560 --> 00:07:15,520
Speaker 1: success where countries really did come together and pledge fairly

125
00:07:15,560 --> 00:07:18,720
Speaker 1: significant Twenty thirty targets. What is the mood in the

126
00:07:18,800 --> 00:07:21,840
Speaker 1: run up to this cop the Brazil presidency or their

127
00:07:21,880 --> 00:07:24,160
Speaker 1: expectations that they're going to be able to deliver in

128
00:07:24,160 --> 00:07:26,920
Speaker 1: the same way that the UK presidency did for Glasgow Cop.

129
00:07:27,160 --> 00:07:31,200
Speaker 2: I think that the Brazil residency would certainly hope that

130
00:07:31,280 --> 00:07:35,320
Speaker 2: it will deliver us similarly successful cop as Cop twenty

131
00:07:35,360 --> 00:07:39,720
Speaker 2: six in Glasgow. Our expectations are that it won't be

132
00:07:39,920 --> 00:07:42,680
Speaker 2: such a resounding success. I think one of the key

133
00:07:43,120 --> 00:07:46,720
Speaker 2: areas where the climate negotiations do tend to be weaker

134
00:07:46,760 --> 00:07:49,880
Speaker 2: in terms of their progress is around ambition, and that

135
00:07:50,040 --> 00:07:52,480
Speaker 2: is a key topic for this year's COP. So in

136
00:07:52,520 --> 00:07:55,240
Speaker 2: some respects it will be very difficult for Cop thirty

137
00:07:55,360 --> 00:07:58,320
Speaker 2: to be marked as a kind of a huge step forward.

138
00:07:58,480 --> 00:08:00,560
Speaker 2: That doesn't mean there will be no kind of errors

139
00:08:00,600 --> 00:08:05,920
Speaker 2: of progress, but overall we're not overly optimistic.

140
00:08:05,520 --> 00:08:07,440
Speaker 1: And so Vicky, you're a bit of a cop queen.

141
00:08:07,600 --> 00:08:09,640
Speaker 1: I mean, how many cops is this now that you

142
00:08:09,640 --> 00:08:11,680
Speaker 1: would have analyzed and covered from so.

143
00:08:11,640 --> 00:08:15,800
Speaker 2: I think I first started directly working on cop content

144
00:08:16,240 --> 00:08:19,120
Speaker 2: at two thousand and nine, so I think actually just

145
00:08:19,240 --> 00:08:24,000
Speaker 2: after the Copenhagen cop which was widely considered a failure.

146
00:08:25,120 --> 00:08:29,240
Speaker 2: We've certainly seen gradual progress and improvement on Copenhagen.

147
00:08:29,960 --> 00:08:32,240
Speaker 1: So that's quite a lot of cops. And now I'm

148
00:08:32,280 --> 00:08:35,960
Speaker 1: sure you're very relieved to have an apprentice here with you, Brinn.

149
00:08:36,240 --> 00:08:40,160
Speaker 1: Welcome to the Cops Circus and the Cops circuit. Can

150
00:08:40,200 --> 00:08:43,720
Speaker 1: you tell us a little bit more about NDC's. What

151
00:08:43,840 --> 00:08:46,440
Speaker 1: are they? Firstly, if we just start there, what are they?

152
00:08:46,480 --> 00:08:48,120
Speaker 1: And then we can talk about what we think they're

153
00:08:48,120 --> 00:08:48,480
Speaker 1: going to be.

154
00:08:48,840 --> 00:08:53,280
Speaker 3: Absolutely so, the NDCs are these country plans that Vicky

155
00:08:53,440 --> 00:08:56,800
Speaker 3: was alluding to that came into play under the Paris

156
00:08:56,800 --> 00:09:02,079
Speaker 3: Agreement when countries committed to one point five degree world

157
00:09:02,400 --> 00:09:06,280
Speaker 3: and these are due every five years. In NBC's they

158
00:09:06,320 --> 00:09:10,560
Speaker 3: stand for Nationally Determined Contributions, so they due every five years,

159
00:09:10,600 --> 00:09:13,560
Speaker 3: and this year they were meant to include twenty thirty

160
00:09:13,600 --> 00:09:17,280
Speaker 3: five emission reduction targets. But you know, we're just we're

161
00:09:17,360 --> 00:09:19,200
Speaker 3: less than two weeks away from the kickoff of KOP

162
00:09:19,400 --> 00:09:23,520
Speaker 3: and only sixty two parties have actually made their submissions.

163
00:09:23,720 --> 00:09:26,120
Speaker 3: So you know, with that question you asked about how

164
00:09:26,280 --> 00:09:30,480
Speaker 3: successful the Brazil will be over the UK. It's also

165
00:09:30,600 --> 00:09:34,960
Speaker 3: kind of a question of the global scene right now

166
00:09:35,200 --> 00:09:38,440
Speaker 3: on ambition, which doesn't have necessarily as much to do

167
00:09:38,520 --> 00:09:41,600
Speaker 3: with Brazil, but just that there has been a slow

168
00:09:41,640 --> 00:09:45,560
Speaker 3: down on climate ambition as countries navigate other kind of

169
00:09:45,600 --> 00:09:50,040
Speaker 3: competing priorities, and as the US has left the Paris Agreement,

170
00:09:50,320 --> 00:09:53,240
Speaker 3: in large economies like the EU have been quite slow

171
00:09:53,320 --> 00:09:54,559
Speaker 3: to make their submissions.

172
00:09:54,840 --> 00:09:57,120
Speaker 1: So in the lead up to Glasgow, we had a

173
00:09:57,200 --> 00:10:00,280
Speaker 1: democratic US presidency which was quite involved in the in

174
00:10:00,280 --> 00:10:02,760
Speaker 1: a cop process. And did we also have a pact

175
00:10:02,840 --> 00:10:06,480
Speaker 1: between the US and China which was agreed in advance

176
00:10:06,559 --> 00:10:09,480
Speaker 1: of the CORP, which helped set the stage for global ambition.

177
00:10:09,720 --> 00:10:11,400
Speaker 1: Is that corrector am I recalling that wrong?

178
00:10:11,920 --> 00:10:14,920
Speaker 2: That was definitely the case. We did have an agreement

179
00:10:15,240 --> 00:10:18,120
Speaker 2: between the US and China announced for for Glasgow, which

180
00:10:18,200 --> 00:10:21,079
Speaker 2: did indeed, as the two biggest emitters, means that they

181
00:10:21,160 --> 00:10:24,320
Speaker 2: have a fair amount of kind of influence at COX,

182
00:10:24,559 --> 00:10:27,080
Speaker 2: so that did help things. But that was actually they

183
00:10:27,200 --> 00:10:31,120
Speaker 2: reached a similar if unofficial agreement before Paris, and that

184
00:10:31,240 --> 00:10:34,000
Speaker 2: was the key reason why actually the Paris Agreement was

185
00:10:34,040 --> 00:10:37,040
Speaker 2: able to be reached. I would say though, that we've

186
00:10:37,040 --> 00:10:40,160
Speaker 2: seen a lot of headlines since January around this kind

187
00:10:40,200 --> 00:10:44,120
Speaker 2: of slow down in low carbon policy. And yes, of

188
00:10:44,200 --> 00:10:48,800
Speaker 2: course we have seen kind of rising geopolitical tensions, trade wars.

189
00:10:49,040 --> 00:10:49,520
Speaker 3: The US.

190
00:10:49,920 --> 00:10:52,480
Speaker 2: Trump one of his first actions when he came back

191
00:10:52,480 --> 00:10:55,520
Speaker 2: into the Oval Office was to sign an executive order

192
00:10:55,600 --> 00:10:59,800
Speaker 2: to exit the Paris Agreement. And indeed he has taken

193
00:11:00,080 --> 00:11:04,040
Speaker 2: many steps to kind of invalidate or gut formed of

194
00:11:04,040 --> 00:11:08,280
Speaker 2: the better description domestic low carbon policy. But based on

195
00:11:08,320 --> 00:11:11,600
Speaker 2: our Policy Scoreboard report that we're going to be publishing

196
00:11:11,640 --> 00:11:14,560
Speaker 2: on the third of November, shows that there are signs

197
00:11:14,640 --> 00:11:19,840
Speaker 2: for actual continued ambition and actual countries continuing to implement

198
00:11:20,040 --> 00:11:21,959
Speaker 2: concrete low carbon policy support.

199
00:11:22,240 --> 00:11:25,120
Speaker 1: But so, how much do cops risen for the success

200
00:11:25,160 --> 00:11:27,520
Speaker 1: of a cop how much do they risen for on

201
00:11:27,760 --> 00:11:31,920
Speaker 1: US leadership or the lack of the kind of crucial.

202
00:11:31,520 --> 00:11:35,160
Speaker 2: Point of the Paris Agreement is that all pledges are voluntary.

203
00:11:35,240 --> 00:11:38,080
Speaker 2: So the key kind of driver for parties to increase

204
00:11:38,120 --> 00:11:41,400
Speaker 2: the ambition of their pledges is peer pressure. Now, if

205
00:11:41,400 --> 00:11:45,040
Speaker 2: you have the second biggest emitter the country that was

206
00:11:45,120 --> 00:11:48,640
Speaker 2: responsible for the biggest share of historical emissions, which is

207
00:11:48,640 --> 00:11:52,560
Speaker 2: actually the crucial cause of climate change. And if you

208
00:11:52,640 --> 00:11:55,600
Speaker 2: have that party that's no longer in the room or

209
00:11:55,760 --> 00:12:00,480
Speaker 2: no longer participating actively in the negotiations under the Paris,

210
00:12:00,559 --> 00:12:04,240
Speaker 2: then there is less pressure on countries to actually increase

211
00:12:04,240 --> 00:12:07,480
Speaker 2: the ambition of their pledges. It also means that historically

212
00:12:07,559 --> 00:12:11,040
Speaker 2: the US has along with the European Union, been a

213
00:12:11,120 --> 00:12:15,800
Speaker 2: key player in pushing for more ambitious climate friendly outcomes

214
00:12:15,840 --> 00:12:18,520
Speaker 2: from COP. So now the EU is going to have

215
00:12:18,600 --> 00:12:22,400
Speaker 2: to look to other parties such as China to actually

216
00:12:22,480 --> 00:12:25,559
Speaker 2: kind to build alliances and to be able to push

217
00:12:25,600 --> 00:12:30,000
Speaker 2: through equally ambitious and bold climate decisions at COP. But

218
00:12:30,320 --> 00:12:32,880
Speaker 2: it doesn't mean the kind of end of COP. It

219
00:12:32,920 --> 00:12:36,880
Speaker 2: doesn't mean that nothing will be achieved in Belem. It

220
00:12:37,000 --> 00:12:40,000
Speaker 2: just means that it will spur other countries to actually

221
00:12:40,000 --> 00:12:44,440
Speaker 2: form alliances with other parties, and potentially it could mean

222
00:12:44,520 --> 00:12:48,160
Speaker 2: that countries that were undecided about their level of ambition

223
00:12:48,520 --> 00:12:51,320
Speaker 2: would might reduce the ambition of their pledges. But it

224
00:12:51,320 --> 00:12:55,480
Speaker 2: doesn't mean that suddenly, historically climate ambitious parties are suddenly

225
00:12:55,520 --> 00:12:57,280
Speaker 2: going to be not climate ambitious at all.

226
00:12:57,440 --> 00:13:00,559
Speaker 1: So the role of the EU has become more important

227
00:13:00,600 --> 00:13:03,920
Speaker 1: than ever in the absence of US leadership or indeed

228
00:13:03,960 --> 00:13:06,400
Speaker 1: participation in this camp, brit if I can bring you

229
00:13:06,480 --> 00:13:09,480
Speaker 1: back in here, what is the status of the EU?

230
00:13:09,920 --> 00:13:11,880
Speaker 1: Have they submitted their NDC?

231
00:13:12,480 --> 00:13:16,080
Speaker 3: So the EU has not submitted its NDC, which is

232
00:13:16,320 --> 00:13:20,040
Speaker 3: very out of character for a market that has really

233
00:13:20,160 --> 00:13:24,120
Speaker 3: led on climate ambition historically. And one reason that they

234
00:13:24,160 --> 00:13:28,480
Speaker 3: haven't submitted is because they have been trying to agree

235
00:13:28,600 --> 00:13:33,120
Speaker 3: on a twenty forty target before making their submission, and

236
00:13:33,160 --> 00:13:37,240
Speaker 3: the twenty forty target would amend the European Climate Law.

237
00:13:37,400 --> 00:13:41,200
Speaker 3: So over the summer the European Commission proposed this ninety

238
00:13:41,240 --> 00:13:45,080
Speaker 3: percent reduction from nineteen ninety levels by twenty forty, but

239
00:13:45,200 --> 00:13:47,600
Speaker 3: this has to go through the Council of the EU

240
00:13:47,840 --> 00:13:52,240
Speaker 3: as well as European Parliament to amend the European Climate Law,

241
00:13:52,440 --> 00:13:56,280
Speaker 3: and leaders have been unable to reach an agreement. So

242
00:13:56,440 --> 00:13:59,440
Speaker 3: as a result of not being able to agree on

243
00:13:59,440 --> 00:14:02,520
Speaker 3: the twenty four target, they have not submitted the twenty

244
00:14:02,520 --> 00:14:05,120
Speaker 3: thirty five target. And the twenty thirty five target does

245
00:14:05,120 --> 00:14:09,680
Speaker 3: not need the same legislative approval process as the European

246
00:14:09,720 --> 00:14:13,400
Speaker 3: Climate Law, so the Council of the EU last month

247
00:14:13,559 --> 00:14:17,480
Speaker 3: did submit a statement of intent on what its likely

248
00:14:17,720 --> 00:14:21,040
Speaker 3: twenty thirty five target would be, which is between sixty

249
00:14:21,040 --> 00:14:23,920
Speaker 3: six point twenty five and seventy two point five percent

250
00:14:24,000 --> 00:14:27,480
Speaker 3: reduction from nineteen ninety levels by twenty thirty five, but

251
00:14:27,640 --> 00:14:31,200
Speaker 3: this has not been formally agreed upon, and we thought

252
00:14:31,280 --> 00:14:35,280
Speaker 3: that they might formally agree in meetings last week in Brussels,

253
00:14:35,400 --> 00:14:39,080
Speaker 3: but no such agreement was made. And now we're looking

254
00:14:39,160 --> 00:14:42,480
Speaker 3: at November fourth, which is the next time that the

255
00:14:42,600 --> 00:14:45,760
Speaker 3: environmental ministers are going to meet, and that's just two

256
00:14:45,840 --> 00:14:48,040
Speaker 3: days before the kickoff the cop and we do believe

257
00:14:48,080 --> 00:14:51,200
Speaker 3: that they will solidify that twenty thirty five target during

258
00:14:51,440 --> 00:14:54,640
Speaker 3: that meeting. But target in the lower range is not

259
00:14:54,920 --> 00:14:59,120
Speaker 3: net zero aligned, but anything above seventy percent reduction, according

260
00:14:59,120 --> 00:15:02,520
Speaker 3: to our BNF analysis, is net zero aligned, and it

261
00:15:02,520 --> 00:15:05,200
Speaker 3: would keep the block on track as well for that

262
00:15:05,280 --> 00:15:09,080
Speaker 3: ninety percent target for twenty forty and net zero for

263
00:15:09,160 --> 00:15:09,800
Speaker 3: twenty fifty.

264
00:15:10,480 --> 00:15:14,320
Speaker 1: And so is that if it's zero aligned, is that

265
00:15:15,040 --> 00:15:17,840
Speaker 1: enough to keep in the spirit of the Paras agreement

266
00:15:18,080 --> 00:15:21,400
Speaker 1: and the mechanism of pledges, because that mechanism states that

267
00:15:21,440 --> 00:15:25,640
Speaker 1: each successive pledge should be more ambitious than the last

268
00:15:26,040 --> 00:15:29,080
Speaker 1: so what does that mean. Does that mean that the

269
00:15:29,240 --> 00:15:33,240
Speaker 1: overall trajectory needs to be going faster or does it

270
00:15:33,360 --> 00:15:36,400
Speaker 1: just mean that there needs to be a progression in

271
00:15:36,400 --> 00:15:37,600
Speaker 1: emissions reductions.

272
00:15:37,920 --> 00:15:41,320
Speaker 3: So in our analysis, the EU is on track to

273
00:15:41,400 --> 00:15:45,280
Speaker 3: me it's twenty thirty target, which is fifty five percent reduction,

274
00:15:45,640 --> 00:15:48,640
Speaker 3: and we do believe they can stay on track to

275
00:15:49,280 --> 00:15:52,479
Speaker 3: be net zero by twenty fifty. But this isn't necessarily

276
00:15:52,520 --> 00:15:54,920
Speaker 3: going to be a one point five degree scenario as

277
00:15:54,960 --> 00:15:58,360
Speaker 3: outlined in Paris in rbn EF net zero scenario, we

278
00:15:58,440 --> 00:16:01,680
Speaker 3: have a one point seven degree scenario. So I mean,

279
00:16:01,720 --> 00:16:03,760
Speaker 3: while the EU is late, they are still one of

280
00:16:03,800 --> 00:16:07,840
Speaker 3: the only markets that is still setting ambitious targets and

281
00:16:08,560 --> 00:16:09,280
Speaker 3: sticking to them.

282
00:16:09,560 --> 00:16:14,479
Speaker 1: And so I mean the European legislative process is famously

283
00:16:14,800 --> 00:16:19,040
Speaker 1: complicated and labyrinthine. But what has led to the EU

284
00:16:19,200 --> 00:16:24,200
Speaker 1: having it's duck so out of order that their domestic policy?

285
00:16:24,640 --> 00:16:26,320
Speaker 1: You know, is there a lack of agreement between the

286
00:16:26,360 --> 00:16:29,800
Speaker 1: member states or have they just been disorganized? What's going

287
00:16:29,840 --> 00:16:30,240
Speaker 1: on there?

288
00:16:30,560 --> 00:16:34,360
Speaker 3: So they're not disorganized, but they are not coming to

289
00:16:34,640 --> 00:16:38,520
Speaker 3: an agreement. And you know, everyone agrees that the EU

290
00:16:38,560 --> 00:16:42,480
Speaker 3: wants to maintain industrial competition and keep consumer prices low

291
00:16:42,680 --> 00:16:46,400
Speaker 3: while achieving these ambitious climate targets. But how we get

292
00:16:46,480 --> 00:16:50,200
Speaker 3: there is where they disagree. So the biggest point of

293
00:16:50,240 --> 00:16:53,560
Speaker 3: contention about setting the ninety percent target is the use

294
00:16:53,720 --> 00:16:57,400
Speaker 3: of international carbon credits under Article six, and the proposal

295
00:16:57,440 --> 00:17:01,200
Speaker 3: as it stands now allows member states to meet their

296
00:17:01,360 --> 00:17:05,240
Speaker 3: targets using international carbon credits up to three percent of

297
00:17:05,280 --> 00:17:09,199
Speaker 3: their nineteen ninety levels are mission levels. But some believe

298
00:17:09,280 --> 00:17:12,879
Speaker 3: that this is too flexible or believe that it's not

299
00:17:12,920 --> 00:17:15,760
Speaker 3: flexible enough. And then there's the questions about the actual

300
00:17:15,760 --> 00:17:18,159
Speaker 3: credits and the integrity of the credits, the standards of

301
00:17:18,160 --> 00:17:20,159
Speaker 3: the credits. And you know that's actually going to be

302
00:17:20,200 --> 00:17:24,000
Speaker 3: a big topic at COP this year is Article six

303
00:17:24,280 --> 00:17:27,360
Speaker 3: and how it works in practice with treating carbon credits

304
00:17:27,400 --> 00:17:30,520
Speaker 3: from country to country, and that you will also be

305
00:17:30,560 --> 00:17:33,439
Speaker 3: able to speak more about where Article six stands and

306
00:17:33,480 --> 00:17:35,080
Speaker 3: what we expect from that at COP.

307
00:17:35,600 --> 00:17:38,880
Speaker 2: I think one of the issues that we've had is

308
00:17:38,920 --> 00:17:41,679
Speaker 2: that over the last eighteen months or so at the

309
00:17:41,800 --> 00:17:44,800
Speaker 2: domestic level in the EU, we've seen in certain member

310
00:17:44,840 --> 00:17:47,879
Speaker 2: states a political shift to the right. So when we

311
00:17:47,920 --> 00:17:51,400
Speaker 2: had the European Parliament elections last year, so that's where

312
00:17:51,440 --> 00:17:54,760
Speaker 2: systems can vote directly for their members of parliament. We

313
00:17:54,800 --> 00:17:59,160
Speaker 2: saw some of the more climate conservative parties really increase

314
00:17:59,240 --> 00:18:03,119
Speaker 2: their share or seats. So the European Parliament has tended

315
00:18:03,160 --> 00:18:06,520
Speaker 2: to be greener than the Council of the EU, which

316
00:18:06,560 --> 00:18:09,960
Speaker 2: is represented directly by a member state governments itself. So

317
00:18:10,080 --> 00:18:13,320
Speaker 2: because both of these entities have slightly moved to the right,

318
00:18:13,560 --> 00:18:17,000
Speaker 2: it means that, as Brynce said, they've kind of refocused

319
00:18:17,080 --> 00:18:21,920
Speaker 2: on energy security industrial competitiveness. EU hasn't suddenly scrapped its

320
00:18:21,920 --> 00:18:25,119
Speaker 2: net zero target, but as Brynn said, how it gets

321
00:18:25,160 --> 00:18:27,600
Speaker 2: there and how fast it gets there is more of

322
00:18:27,640 --> 00:18:31,439
Speaker 2: a topic for debate. So hence why a concession to

323
00:18:31,560 --> 00:18:34,880
Speaker 2: some of the less ambitious EU member state. The EU

324
00:18:34,960 --> 00:18:37,960
Speaker 2: has kind of somewhat changed its position on the use

325
00:18:37,960 --> 00:18:40,520
Speaker 2: of carbon credits, because previously it said, no, we won't

326
00:18:40,600 --> 00:18:44,520
Speaker 2: use carbon credits to achieve our missions targets, but here

327
00:18:44,840 --> 00:18:47,920
Speaker 2: the proposal that was released in July suggested that they will.

328
00:18:48,040 --> 00:18:51,600
Speaker 2: But interestingly, it's for a really really small amount, so

329
00:18:51,680 --> 00:18:54,000
Speaker 2: in practice it will make little difference. But it was

330
00:18:54,040 --> 00:18:56,640
Speaker 2: more of a kind of political token gesture to get

331
00:18:56,720 --> 00:18:59,560
Speaker 2: some of the other member states on side.

332
00:19:00,000 --> 00:19:02,720
Speaker 1: I mean, isn't once once the country has set the

333
00:19:02,800 --> 00:19:05,840
Speaker 1: long term objective of net zero by twenty fifty, which

334
00:19:05,880 --> 00:19:08,000
Speaker 1: is the case for the European Union and most of

335
00:19:08,040 --> 00:19:10,919
Speaker 1: the developed world, you know, twenty sixty or twenty seventy

336
00:19:10,960 --> 00:19:14,680
Speaker 1: for developing countries. Isn't the setting of interium targets then

337
00:19:14,800 --> 00:19:18,080
Speaker 1: pretty straightforward? Don't you just draw a line from here

338
00:19:18,280 --> 00:19:21,760
Speaker 1: to twenty fifty or your terminal point, and then there

339
00:19:21,800 --> 00:19:24,440
Speaker 1: you go, there's the number for all the points in between.

340
00:19:24,560 --> 00:19:25,879
Speaker 1: Is it not that simple?

341
00:19:26,160 --> 00:19:30,240
Speaker 3: Yeah? Unfortunately it's not that simple. And the EU is

342
00:19:30,280 --> 00:19:34,840
Speaker 3: really navigating these competing priorities of maintaining competition and energy

343
00:19:34,880 --> 00:19:38,399
Speaker 3: security while reaching the target. So it's all about how

344
00:19:38,600 --> 00:19:43,480
Speaker 3: how do we get to these targets without spiking consumer prices,

345
00:19:43,680 --> 00:19:48,480
Speaker 3: without decreasing the industrial competitiveness, without these other really important

346
00:19:48,520 --> 00:19:49,640
Speaker 3: priorities in the EU.

347
00:19:50,040 --> 00:19:52,879
Speaker 1: And so you know the other most important player in

348
00:19:53,240 --> 00:19:56,800
Speaker 1: the cop negotiations, well the two I would say at

349
00:19:56,920 --> 00:20:00,160
Speaker 1: China and India. So where are they at with their.

350
00:20:01,000 --> 00:20:04,560
Speaker 2: So China has also not yet submitted its NDC, and

351
00:20:04,600 --> 00:20:07,200
Speaker 2: I think one of the reasons why this could be

352
00:20:07,240 --> 00:20:09,720
Speaker 2: the case for China, but also for other parties, and

353
00:20:09,760 --> 00:20:12,520
Speaker 2: why they've really kind of lagged behind on submissions is

354
00:20:12,720 --> 00:20:15,720
Speaker 2: because of this driver of peer pressure. So governments have

355
00:20:15,760 --> 00:20:18,399
Speaker 2: been waiting to see what their peers have been announcing

356
00:20:18,440 --> 00:20:20,840
Speaker 2: and then deciding that on their own ambition. Now, in

357
00:20:20,920 --> 00:20:24,960
Speaker 2: the case of China, at New York Climate Week in September,

358
00:20:25,119 --> 00:20:29,200
Speaker 2: President did announce their twenty thirty five emissions target, which

359
00:20:29,240 --> 00:20:32,120
Speaker 2: is really the thing that most people care about in

360
00:20:32,160 --> 00:20:35,639
Speaker 2: this new round of NDCs. On an absolute level, it

361
00:20:35,960 --> 00:20:38,880
Speaker 2: was modest, would be a kind of British plight way

362
00:20:38,880 --> 00:20:41,679
Speaker 2: of putting it. It would not be in line with

363
00:20:42,080 --> 00:20:45,680
Speaker 2: both our BNFS net zero scenario or indeed are kind

364
00:20:45,720 --> 00:20:49,720
Speaker 2: of economics driven base case. The economic transition scenario, however,

365
00:20:50,440 --> 00:20:53,320
Speaker 2: was it was significant in that it was the first

366
00:20:53,520 --> 00:20:57,480
Speaker 2: of China's missions targets to cover first of all greenhouse gases.

367
00:20:57,600 --> 00:21:00,199
Speaker 2: Previously it's just been CO two and they all so

368
00:21:00,400 --> 00:21:03,720
Speaker 2: is based on absolute volume of missions. Now this may

369
00:21:03,720 --> 00:21:07,720
Speaker 2: seem like a kind of technicality, but previously China and

370
00:21:08,040 --> 00:21:11,720
Speaker 2: indeed still India and other emerging markets, they've based their

371
00:21:11,840 --> 00:21:15,560
Speaker 2: emissions targets on emissions per unit of GDP or some

372
00:21:15,760 --> 00:21:18,880
Speaker 2: either mechanism that gives them some kind of leeway where

373
00:21:18,880 --> 00:21:22,520
Speaker 2: they can still grow their economies but meet their targets

374
00:21:22,800 --> 00:21:27,320
Speaker 2: while increasing emissions. However, by committing to a reduction absolute

375
00:21:27,400 --> 00:21:30,080
Speaker 2: volumes of emissions, it kind of means that it's more

376
00:21:30,119 --> 00:21:34,360
Speaker 2: certain that China will actually achieve that target. And this

377
00:21:34,440 --> 00:21:37,679
Speaker 2: is this move towards an absolute target has been something

378
00:21:37,720 --> 00:21:41,159
Speaker 2: that has been pushed for by developed economies like the

379
00:21:41,200 --> 00:21:44,800
Speaker 2: EU and indeed previously the US, So we see it

380
00:21:44,880 --> 00:21:49,000
Speaker 2: as a politically significant shift that could indeed kind of

381
00:21:49,080 --> 00:21:52,200
Speaker 2: strengthen relations between the EU and China.

382
00:21:52,280 --> 00:21:55,520
Speaker 1: So, China hasn't formally submitted the NBC, but President she

383
00:21:55,680 --> 00:21:59,040
Speaker 1: did announce it in the UN General Assembly, so it's

384
00:21:59,119 --> 00:22:01,800
Speaker 1: known what it will be. It is the first time

385
00:22:01,800 --> 00:22:04,879
Speaker 1: that China has pledged an absolute reduction and an acknowledgement

386
00:22:04,960 --> 00:22:07,440
Speaker 1: really the emissions NOBIL peak. So that does seem like

387
00:22:07,480 --> 00:22:11,720
Speaker 1: a pretty important progression from the world's largest emitter. How

388
00:22:11,760 --> 00:22:14,679
Speaker 1: about India. Has India put forward in NDC and what

389
00:22:14,720 --> 00:22:16,119
Speaker 1: are they likely to do so?

390
00:22:16,320 --> 00:22:20,040
Speaker 2: No, India has not yet issued a new NDC. It

391
00:22:20,119 --> 00:22:23,560
Speaker 2: seems likely that it will do so either before or

392
00:22:23,640 --> 00:22:26,679
Speaker 2: during COP thirty. We don't know much about the kind

393
00:22:26,720 --> 00:22:29,240
Speaker 2: of level of ambition, but we do know that it's

394
00:22:29,280 --> 00:22:33,320
Speaker 2: twenty thirty emissions targets, which was in its previous NDC,

395
00:22:33,760 --> 00:22:36,879
Speaker 2: is not in line with BENF net zero scenario. It

396
00:22:37,000 --> 00:22:40,840
Speaker 2: also is one of the targets that's based on emission's intensity,

397
00:22:41,119 --> 00:22:44,200
Speaker 2: so it would be also a significant shift if it

398
00:22:44,440 --> 00:22:47,600
Speaker 2: moved to an absolute emissions target. It seems unlikely though,

399
00:22:47,680 --> 00:22:50,199
Speaker 2: that India is going to ratchet up its ambitions so

400
00:22:50,359 --> 00:22:54,040
Speaker 2: much that thirty thirty five if target is NETDA aligned.

401
00:22:54,280 --> 00:22:57,840
Speaker 1: So the signs so far I'm looking great for a

402
00:22:58,280 --> 00:23:02,239
Speaker 1: real increase in an ambition compared to what we currently have.

403
00:23:02,680 --> 00:23:05,440
Speaker 1: So I think that the climate math sort of comes

404
00:23:05,440 --> 00:23:09,520
Speaker 1: out at current pledges in dcs that were submitted in

405
00:23:09,600 --> 00:23:12,400
Speaker 1: previous COPS put the world on track for about two

406
00:23:12,480 --> 00:23:15,960
Speaker 1: point seven degrees of warming. If I'm not mistaken, Yeah,

407
00:23:16,000 --> 00:23:18,520
Speaker 1: I would agree with that. However, I do think it's

408
00:23:18,560 --> 00:23:22,159
Speaker 1: significant that China has submitted an absolute target and so

409
00:23:22,320 --> 00:23:26,240
Speaker 1: has Indonesia. So these two economies who before had not

410
00:23:26,280 --> 00:23:30,800
Speaker 1: submitted absolute targets are now switching to absolute and that

411
00:23:30,960 --> 00:23:34,880
Speaker 1: is certainly the gold standard of type of target over

412
00:23:35,000 --> 00:23:37,520
Speaker 1: the emissions intensity and the baseline scenario.

413
00:23:37,880 --> 00:23:41,640
Speaker 2: And there have been major economies who have announced targets

414
00:23:41,640 --> 00:23:43,919
Speaker 2: that are either more ambitious or in line with our

415
00:23:44,040 --> 00:23:47,800
Speaker 2: net zero scenario, including your own Australia, COVID, but also

416
00:23:48,280 --> 00:23:51,439
Speaker 2: this year's hosts Brazil and the UK. So it's not

417
00:23:51,520 --> 00:23:52,440
Speaker 2: all doom and glue.

418
00:23:52,680 --> 00:23:55,920
Speaker 3: Yeah, Brazil in the UK were actually more ambitious than

419
00:23:55,960 --> 00:24:00,720
Speaker 3: our net zero scenario for energy emissions, and Japan Canada

420
00:24:00,800 --> 00:24:04,120
Speaker 3: are not more ambitious than net zero, but they are

421
00:24:04,359 --> 00:24:08,800
Speaker 3: more ambitious than the base case or economics alone would dictate.

422
00:24:09,200 --> 00:24:12,240
Speaker 3: And then we've got Australia, and so Australia is in

423
00:24:12,280 --> 00:24:14,520
Speaker 3: line with our net zero scenario. So we do have

424
00:24:14,680 --> 00:24:17,240
Speaker 3: several economies that are either more ambitious or in line

425
00:24:17,400 --> 00:24:19,879
Speaker 3: with our net zero scenario. And then a handful that

426
00:24:19,920 --> 00:24:21,840
Speaker 3: are also that are not going to be on a

427
00:24:21,840 --> 00:24:25,640
Speaker 3: net zero trajectory, but are still more ambitious than economics

428
00:24:25,720 --> 00:24:29,879
Speaker 3: alone would dictate. And these are just their targets. They

429
00:24:29,920 --> 00:24:32,080
Speaker 3: are still going to need a lot of financing and

430
00:24:32,240 --> 00:24:34,680
Speaker 3: policy to achieve those targets.

431
00:24:35,320 --> 00:24:39,840
Speaker 1: So, Vicki Brinn, what are our expectations for the cop

432
00:24:39,880 --> 00:24:41,280
Speaker 1: what do we think will be achieved?

433
00:24:41,600 --> 00:24:44,000
Speaker 3: So while we said, you know, only a third of

434
00:24:44,320 --> 00:24:48,600
Speaker 3: economies have made their NDC submissions before the conference. We

435
00:24:48,800 --> 00:24:53,080
Speaker 3: actually do expect that the remaining major economies will make

436
00:24:53,200 --> 00:24:56,080
Speaker 3: their submissions by the end of the conference, so a

437
00:24:56,080 --> 00:24:59,600
Speaker 3: lot of those we expect to be made at COP. However,

438
00:24:59,680 --> 00:25:03,600
Speaker 3: we i don't expect the majority of global emissions to

439
00:25:03,720 --> 00:25:07,320
Speaker 3: be covered by a net zero aligned target unfortunately.

440
00:25:07,720 --> 00:25:10,720
Speaker 2: So in terms of the other kind of key topics

441
00:25:10,800 --> 00:25:14,160
Speaker 2: at COP this year, the Brazil presidency has been really

442
00:25:14,160 --> 00:25:18,600
Speaker 2: pushing for more of these concrete action pledges. So a

443
00:25:18,600 --> 00:25:21,400
Speaker 2: few years ago we had a pledge that a lot

444
00:25:21,440 --> 00:25:24,960
Speaker 2: of countries signed up to triple renewables capacity by twenty

445
00:25:25,080 --> 00:25:29,320
Speaker 2: thirty and to transition away from fossil fuels. Now, these pledges,

446
00:25:29,359 --> 00:25:32,280
Speaker 2: for various reasons, were not included in the agreement from

447
00:25:32,400 --> 00:25:35,560
Speaker 2: last year's COP, but we expect them to be resuscitated

448
00:25:35,640 --> 00:25:39,040
Speaker 2: this year. We are more confident that the kind of

449
00:25:39,080 --> 00:25:42,639
Speaker 2: COP thirty agreement could include that renewables pledge, but the

450
00:25:42,680 --> 00:25:46,680
Speaker 2: fossil fueld one was highly contentious and remain so, so

451
00:25:46,720 --> 00:25:49,679
Speaker 2: we're less confident about that. Last year, one of the

452
00:25:49,720 --> 00:25:53,760
Speaker 2: key achievements in Baku was these new climate finance targets.

453
00:25:54,040 --> 00:25:57,000
Speaker 2: Would expect that if we deem COP thirty to have

454
00:25:57,000 --> 00:25:59,960
Speaker 2: made concrete progress in this area that they'd actually agree

455
00:26:00,080 --> 00:26:03,000
Speaker 2: on a roadmap with specific actions for that. But we

456
00:26:03,080 --> 00:26:05,600
Speaker 2: are not that confident about that. But one of the

457
00:26:05,680 --> 00:26:08,600
Speaker 2: areas that we are more confident about, one reason being

458
00:26:08,600 --> 00:26:11,479
Speaker 2: that this is a huge priority for Brazil, is around

459
00:26:11,520 --> 00:26:14,960
Speaker 2: carbon markets. So we are fairly confident that they could

460
00:26:15,000 --> 00:26:19,199
Speaker 2: make at least more of the steps towards agreeing actual

461
00:26:19,240 --> 00:26:24,359
Speaker 2: standards for eligible project activities and take us one step further.

462
00:26:24,560 --> 00:26:26,840
Speaker 2: Although it has been ten years and I'm making now

463
00:26:27,000 --> 00:26:31,000
Speaker 2: towards launching these Article six as their own carbon markets.

464
00:26:31,040 --> 00:26:33,399
Speaker 2: But I think one thing that I wanted therefore to

465
00:26:33,520 --> 00:26:37,199
Speaker 2: flag though about all of this discussion about NDCs is

466
00:26:37,240 --> 00:26:40,760
Speaker 2: that in some respects, that's the easy work done. It's

467
00:26:41,040 --> 00:26:44,919
Speaker 2: relatively easy to announce a targets. What's more difficult is

468
00:26:44,960 --> 00:26:49,520
Speaker 2: to actually implement the concrete policy support to achieve that target.

469
00:26:49,720 --> 00:26:52,480
Speaker 2: And that's something that we're going to be looking at

470
00:26:52,600 --> 00:26:55,560
Speaker 2: in the report that we're publishing on the third of

471
00:26:55,640 --> 00:26:58,920
Speaker 2: November called our G twenty Policy Scoreboard, which is our

472
00:26:58,960 --> 00:27:02,840
Speaker 2: annual assessment of the G twenty economies based on and

473
00:27:02,960 --> 00:27:06,000
Speaker 2: how much and how good their low carbon support is.

474
00:27:06,320 --> 00:27:08,920
Speaker 1: Just to pick up on that point about the tripling

475
00:27:08,960 --> 00:27:12,160
Speaker 1: renewables pledge in the fossil fuel phase out pledges, which

476
00:27:12,160 --> 00:27:14,800
Speaker 1: were all made in the UAE Consensus a couple of

477
00:27:14,880 --> 00:27:17,919
Speaker 1: years ago. Do the achievements of previous cops need to

478
00:27:17,960 --> 00:27:21,800
Speaker 1: be restated in every subsequent COP or once they've been

479
00:27:21,840 --> 00:27:23,840
Speaker 1: agreed that they already set.

480
00:27:24,040 --> 00:27:27,240
Speaker 2: Well, you would think so that once they've agreed something

481
00:27:27,320 --> 00:27:30,879
Speaker 2: that that didn't need to be reiterated. But every COP agreement,

482
00:27:31,200 --> 00:27:35,159
Speaker 2: to some extent, starts are fresh with what pledges is

483
00:27:35,280 --> 00:27:38,560
Speaker 2: going to be made. As with all types of policies,

484
00:27:38,560 --> 00:27:40,480
Speaker 2: the devil is in the detail, so the use of

485
00:27:40,520 --> 00:27:43,880
Speaker 2: a particular verb can change the nuance of their agreement.

486
00:27:44,080 --> 00:27:46,680
Speaker 2: So each year it does seem to be that they

487
00:27:46,760 --> 00:27:50,880
Speaker 2: have somewhat of the same discussion around how they're going

488
00:27:50,920 --> 00:27:54,000
Speaker 2: to phrase the commitments around say the Paris Agreement, some

489
00:27:54,040 --> 00:27:57,639
Speaker 2: of them all kind of detailed commitments. So therefore it

490
00:27:57,760 --> 00:28:00,840
Speaker 2: is quite a sign if a copper agreement does not

491
00:28:01,000 --> 00:28:04,360
Speaker 2: reiterate the same pledge made in the previous year, so.

492
00:28:04,640 --> 00:28:09,479
Speaker 1: Yet more complexity to the devilish detail and ourkaneness of

493
00:28:09,560 --> 00:28:13,440
Speaker 1: the negotiation of a COP text. They're quite a site

494
00:28:13,520 --> 00:28:18,040
Speaker 1: to behold the working text. So how much does the

495
00:28:18,200 --> 00:28:21,879
Speaker 1: US's absence really hang over this COP and do we

496
00:28:21,920 --> 00:28:24,160
Speaker 1: think that they're actually going to attend. Are they going

497
00:28:24,200 --> 00:28:28,280
Speaker 1: to send a unofficial delegation to at least observe the

498
00:28:28,320 --> 00:28:30,960
Speaker 1: COP or try and exert some background influence.

499
00:28:31,359 --> 00:28:33,960
Speaker 2: Well, a couple of things. So, first of all, Trump

500
00:28:34,000 --> 00:28:36,919
Speaker 2: did indeed sign that executive order to exit the Paris

501
00:28:36,960 --> 00:28:41,120
Speaker 2: Agreement in January. That's changed takes a year to take effect,

502
00:28:41,320 --> 00:28:45,160
Speaker 2: So in theory, the US is eligible to still participate

503
00:28:45,240 --> 00:28:49,040
Speaker 2: in the Paris Agreement specific negotiations, but the US is

504
00:28:49,120 --> 00:28:52,800
Speaker 2: not exited from the Framework Convention on Climate Change, so

505
00:28:52,880 --> 00:28:57,040
Speaker 2: it is still allowed to attend the COP negotiations. As

506
00:28:57,080 --> 00:29:00,000
Speaker 2: you've just mentioned, it's highly complex process, so there are

507
00:29:00,080 --> 00:29:03,680
Speaker 2: multiple negotiating streams going on at the same time. Though

508
00:29:03,800 --> 00:29:07,400
Speaker 2: the US can still take active part in those, It's

509
00:29:07,600 --> 00:29:09,720
Speaker 2: hard to know whether it will be more of a

510
00:29:09,800 --> 00:29:13,520
Speaker 2: statement in the eyes of the Trump administration to not

511
00:29:13,640 --> 00:29:18,560
Speaker 2: attend at all, or they will attend and potentially try

512
00:29:18,600 --> 00:29:22,480
Speaker 2: to leverage their influence in favor of the current political

513
00:29:22,480 --> 00:29:24,680
Speaker 2: positions of the federal government.

514
00:29:25,760 --> 00:29:28,120
Speaker 1: So on our final question, a very important one for

515
00:29:28,200 --> 00:29:30,960
Speaker 1: me personally, COP thirty one who is going to be

516
00:29:31,000 --> 00:29:35,560
Speaker 1: the host? Is Australia going to finally achieve that presidency

517
00:29:35,680 --> 00:29:39,120
Speaker 1: or do you think that the Turkey will will hold

518
00:29:39,160 --> 00:29:43,000
Speaker 1: out and manage to fulfill their ambition of hosting one

519
00:29:43,040 --> 00:29:44,200
Speaker 1: of these major events.

520
00:29:44,440 --> 00:29:47,760
Speaker 2: Yes, I can see Cobert, you might have vested interest. Honestly,

521
00:29:47,760 --> 00:29:50,920
Speaker 2: it's hard to tell at this point. I think that

522
00:29:51,640 --> 00:29:54,720
Speaker 2: it could indeed be a question of seeing how COP

523
00:29:54,800 --> 00:29:58,040
Speaker 2: thirty goes and to what extent we have seen Australia

524
00:29:58,160 --> 00:30:03,360
Speaker 2: increase its ambition it's NDC, so perhaps it is hoping

525
00:30:03,440 --> 00:30:07,160
Speaker 2: that that will increase its credibility and help the decision

526
00:30:07,200 --> 00:30:08,240
Speaker 2: goes in its favor.

527
00:30:08,480 --> 00:30:11,400
Speaker 1: Well, fingers crossed, I'll show my bias on that regard.

528
00:30:12,040 --> 00:30:15,080
Speaker 1: I very much hope that Australia triumphs in its bid

529
00:30:15,120 --> 00:30:17,440
Speaker 1: to host COP thirty one. It will be much easier

530
00:30:17,440 --> 00:30:19,920
Speaker 1: for me to attend in Adelaide from Sydney than it

531
00:30:19,920 --> 00:30:22,400
Speaker 1: would be to trek all the way to blame or

532
00:30:22,440 --> 00:30:25,560
Speaker 1: any of the other cops. Vicky Brinn thank you very

533
00:30:25,600 --> 00:30:28,600
Speaker 1: much for their conversation and we look forward to all

534
00:30:28,680 --> 00:30:32,160
Speaker 1: of the analysis that you will release to help navigate

535
00:30:32,200 --> 00:30:36,320
Speaker 1: the soup of complexity and drama, both before and after.

536
00:30:36,640 --> 00:30:39,360
Speaker 3: Thank you so much for having us GOBAD, Thank you, Cobert.

537
00:30:48,200 --> 00:30:51,320
Speaker 1: Today's episode of Switched On was produced by Cam Gray

538
00:30:51,520 --> 00:30:53,920
Speaker 1: with production assistance from Kamala Shelling.

539
00:30:54,080 --> 00:30:57,240
Speaker 2: Bloomberg EF is a service provided by Bloomberg Finance LP

540
00:30:57,440 --> 00:30:58,280
Speaker 2: and its affiliates.

541
00:30:58,360 --> 00:31:01,040
Speaker 1: This recording does not constitute, nor should it be construed,

542
00:31:01,080 --> 00:31:04,960
Speaker 1: as investment advice, investment recommendations, or a recommendation as to

543
00:31:05,040 --> 00:31:07,880
Speaker 1: an investment or other strategy. Bloomberg ANNIAF should not be

544
00:31:07,920 --> 00:31:11,720
Speaker 1: considered as information sufficient upon which to base an investment decision.

545
00:31:11,800 --> 00:31:14,800
Speaker 2: Neither Bloomberg Finance LP nor any of its affiliates makes

546
00:31:14,800 --> 00:31:18,560
Speaker 2: any representation or warranty as to the accuracy or completeness

547
00:31:18,560 --> 00:31:20,640
Speaker 2: of the information contained in this recording, and

548
00:31:20,720 --> 00:31:23,680
Speaker 3: Any liability as a result of this recording is expressly

549
00:31:23,720 --> 00:31:24,280
Speaker 3: disclaimed