Paris climate deal could be a "weak, unambitious and inequitable" accord as most of the crucial components like mitigation and financial commitments are likely to be not legally binding, an Indian green body today said, a day after the new draft negotiating text was released.
Asserting that the issue of fair share in the carbon budget must be a part of the text, Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) said that if that is not done, equity will not be operationalised and a climate change regime will be created which is built on "intolerance towards voice of powerless" and will further "climate change apartheid".
It also said that France being the host of the conference, needs to think whether it wants to become part of this kind of regime.
Noting that the text draft does not have a mention of fair share of carbon budget, CSE director General Sunita Narain said that there should be a clear reference of it in the final text.
"We are looking at a weak, unambitious and inequitable deal at Paris. Some of the most important components including mitigation and financial commitments are not likely to be legally binding. We find the language on loss and damage to be weak. This deal promises finance but hesitates to commit.
"CSE wants an ambitious deal but ambition must ensure that there is enough carbon space for the livelihood of billions of people and shield them from impacts of climate change," CSE deputy director general Chandra Bhushan said.
CSE said that the draft text is a complete "dilution" of commitment of developed countries and shifting of burden to developing countries.
"If this draft text becomes agreement, for the first time there will not be a target for developed countries for mitigation. There is also a lack of clear time period in which developed countries are going to take collective as well as individual actions.
"The fight here is lifestyles of and livelihood of millions. In the text, there is not even a mention of fair allocation of carbon budget," Bhushan said.
Narain said that one of the worst components of the draft
text is that it is missing on carbon budget.
"The reason why were are concerned about this is because the question of cutting emissions is about sharing limited carbon budget that remains within now and 2100. The aggregate emission which has been promised by INDCs will not keep the world below the 2 degree target.
"...If you take the US, it has appropriated 21 per cent of the carbon budget between 1850 to 2011. That is the past. Question is what do we do in future.
"If we talk of 2 degree target, then we have 1000 gt of carbon dioxide left. If its 1.5 degree, the carbon budget shrinks to 400-550 gt. The question is not about targets. It is how will we share the carbon budget between the past and future," she said.
She said that US's lack of ambition means it will appropriate another 8-10 per cent between now and 2030.
"If you put together the INDCs, then 80 per cent for remaining budget finishes by 2030 if degree we take the 2 degree target. We do not hear of fair share in debate in Paris. If we want a reference to 1.5 degree, we want the reference to go with an absolute clear reference to sharing the available carbon budget. The fair share has to be part of text.
"Otherwise, we are not operationalising equity, we are creating a climate change regime which is built on intolerance of voice of powerless which furthers climate change apartheid. She said that socialist France has to think about when it signs the deal as a host if it wants to be party to this kind of a regime
She said that as far as point on mitigation is concerned in the present text, India should not sign the deal in this form.
