UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Case No F-2010-06143 Doc No C17528268 Date 01 15 2014 l ' __ _ _ _ _ J '-'• I I _ _ --- -· - I _ _ • _ I • I I RELEASED IN FULL 9 December 1997 Tc Please Sec the Attached List • _ Fxom USDEL Kyoto -Mark G Hamb Subject The Third Confeie m c of the Parties Supplement to Update No 9 December 8 9 1997 Attached sre additional reports preparea by USDBL Kyoto representatives along with a copy of the environmental rag ECO for December 9 Thls report should be read in conjunction with our regulax report Update 9 REVIEW AUTHORITY Alan Flanigan Senior Reviewer UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Case No F-2010-06143 Doc No C17528268 Date 01 15 2014 UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Case No F-2010-06143 Doc No C17528269 Date 01 15 2014 RELEASED IN FULLJ -Committee of the Whole December 6 1997 night session I D Stowell Several issues were covered in the night session of the COW They included Sinks terminology for the term targets and timetables Once again the Chair attempted to discuss the difficulties with sinks He opened the discussion with a brief summary of the most recently tabled non-paper by the chair of the contact group He also explained the SB STA process for detennining the modalities rules and guidelines for sinks Following a brief explanation by Parties about the willingness to continue trying to reach compromise on text as well as the possibility that numbers will likely chnage depending on the outcome of this discussion The sinks group was reconvened for one hour in order to conclude discussion on text Estrada also noted that the reality of the sinks discussion is that some countries are likely to change the level of their target Text relating to multi-year targets The G 77 and China opened this discussion with a proposal for the addition oflanguage on multi-year targets The US proposed alternative language in order to address some of the concerns of the G•77 This in tum resulted in a back and forth on whether the US was shying away from using the phrase quantified emissions limitation and reduction objectives and implementing its commitments The G-77 will consult further on this tomorrow morning Clean Developent Fund--Arti cle 3 18 There was no report from this contact group They are expected to meet tomorrow The chair of the contact group provided a quick summary asking that the report and text not be submitted to Parties until tomorrow Article 10 The was no·progress on Article 10 Me tltodological issues REVIEW AUTHORITY Alan Flanigan Senior ReviewerJ UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Case No F-2010-06143 Doc No C17528269 Date 01 15 2014 UNCLASSIJ I f _D J S Department of State Case No F-2010-06143 Doc No C17528269 Date 01 15 2014 I On a very positive note language on methodoogical issues including a paragraph relateing to emissions resulting from multilateral operations was adopted will vr ry little discussion · Article 13 The chair of the contact group discussed the agreement that was reached on paragraph 2 of the Article on the financial mechanism Once the floor was open for discussion however the Philippeans stated that it would need to consult further with the G-77 This delay was based on the rational that some commitments will now be reflected in the Protocol and that not all Parties to the Convention will be in the Protocol The link between Articles 12 and 13 were also stated as a reason to delay discussion--the Philippeans felt that discussions could not proceed on Article 13 until Article 12 was completed Article 7 The text remains the same Article 6 Canada the chair of an infonnal group working on text for emissions trading presented their work expl aining where the text diverges from the Chair's negoitating text India and China interevened to say that they felt the issue was far too complex and outside the scope of the Berlin Mandate The Chair stated that no one had as yet had time to review the text therefore no discussion would be held UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Case No F-2010-06143 Doc No C17528269 Date 01 15 2014 L NCLASSlf -D _ J S _Dee rt l 1 - t E tate _9-as_e _o__ F-_ _01_Q-9§143 Doc No C17528270 Date 01 15 2014 RELEASED IN FULL MEMORANDUM December 8 1997 To Stuart Eizenstat Melinda Kimble Mark Hambley From Bob Boynto ga-' rS Subj Sensenbrenner Delegation Meeting with Liu Zhenmin on Monday afternoon December 8 the Sensenbrenner delegation met with Liu Zhenmin deputy head of the Chinese delegation The congressmen told Liu that it would be difficult to endorse a treaty that did not include some agreement on the part of developing countries Liu predictably replied that it would be very difficult at this point for China to adhere to a treaty imposing limits on GHG emissions Nor could he say when questioned by Rep Dingell when China might be able to consider taking on such limits Liu stated that China would need a period of economic development to raise the living standards of its people then consideration of limits would follow Liu also stressed that China was trying to make its energy sector more efficient and to diversify from a largely coal-fired electrical generation base This prompted several congressmen to ask him whether China could ·commit to something along the lines of improved energy sector efficiency as opposed to emissions limits Liu probably as much from the lack of an economic background as from the lack of flexibility in his instructions did not seem to grasp their meaning and did not capitalize on the opening that was being handed him Since China has stated that it is embarking on an energy efficiency improvement program Liu might have been able to explore the approach that the congressmen were offering and craft an answer that would have left them something to work wi h In my opinion we are suffering somewhat by the lack of involvement of someone from the State Planning Commission $PC in the bilaterals with U S legislators and officials 0 S Eizenstat's Tuesday morning bilateral with Chen Yaobang an SPC vice chairman as well as Minister of Forestry may be a more productive venue in which to explore Chinese commitments structured in terms of improved industrial efficiency or some other economic measure as opposed to straight emissions limits REVIEW AUTHORITY Alan Flanigan Senior Reviewerr UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Case No F-2010-06143 Doc No C17528270 Date 01 15 2014 I UNCLASSIFIED U S Depa_rtment of State Case No F-2010-0 143 Doc No C17528271 Date 01 15 2014 RELEASED IN FULL Compensation Contact Group D Stowell The contact group on compensation met for five sessions to discuss paragraph 17 of Article 3 Countries participating in the group included Iran who also served as chair Kuwait Nigeria Uganda Saudi Arabia Tanzania Zimbabwe United Arab Emirates Venezuela US Japan Canada Australia the EU Switzerland and New Zealand Discussions centered around the entrenched positioI s of the G-77 and China versus Annex I countries Although every Annex I country stated that the concept of compensation was unacceptable discussions dragged on over the course of three days An attempt at compromise was made by the delegate of Zimbabwe who sought to remove the concept of a fund and insert a process by which an assessment of the impacts on developing countries would be undertaken From the assessment ''appropriate actions read C mpensation fund would be undertaken •This text was modified by the 0-77 to make it clear that one outcome to be undertaken taken would be the establishment of a compensation fQ nd The chair urged Annex I countries to enter into a discussion negotiation on the text After every Annex I country stated that it would be necessary to consult further with their respective delegations the contact group was finally adjourned The Chair for the second time provided a summary to the Chair of the Committee of the Whole NOTE During the course of the discussions it became clear that some Annex I countries were interested in providing some sort of compromise to the G-77 and China Early on Canada had introduced the idea of a process that would build on the assessments that are already undenvay in various- fora This is probably the basis for the originaJ Zimbabwe proposal The JUSCANZ countries along with the EU have held informal infonnal's on this issue Although it was agreed that no compromise language would be tabled during the contact group it seemed likely that Japan would introduce language introducing a process for assessment of impacts Switzerland also discussed wanting ways to accommodate the less developing ountry concerns under other Articles REVIEW AUTHORITY Alan Flanigan Senior Reviewer UNCLASSIFIED U S Department of State Case No F-2010-06143 Doc No C17528271 Date 01 15 2014