A 🧵on #Article6 as #COP26 wraps up.

A6 is the #ParisAgreement’s engine of international cooperation. It’s vital because countries can cut emissions faster & deeper together than on their own.

The decision is not perfect; no text is. But overall it's a step forward. Here’s why. First, a glossary:

ITMO=“internationally transferred mitigation outcome” (btw 2 Parties)
6.4ER=emission reduction under new UN crediting mechanism
CORSIA=Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation
CA=“corresponding adjustment" to prevent double counting

Some reflections on #COP26 as we enter the home stretch. (🧵)

1: The US-China announcement
2. Progress on Article 6
3. The draft COP decision
4. Where we go from here
5. Are we making progress, or just "blah blah blah"?
6. Bringing it all back home. 1/ The US-China announcement is well short of what is ultimately needed—but more than expected and a welcome reset after acrimony of recent months. It builds on April statement in key ways, esp. methane & coal phaseout. And it outlines several concrete areas for collaboration.

Today, @CFTC, a key US financial regulator, released its first-ever climate report, looking at how climate change threatens the US financial system & the economy. I was an author.

This is big news for Wall Street & Main Street. Thread below on why ⬇️

nyti.ms/3bGqP6J 1) The report is the first report on climate-related financial risk under the auspices of a U.S. government regulator

It immediately shifts the debate from whether climate threatens the U.S. financial system, to how to deal with that threat. bit.ly/3bSKYqB

In this chilling @nytimes piece, @malcolm_john of @Heritage argues in support of unmarked federal agents occupying an American city by force to quell political dissent, against the express will of state and local governments. nytimes.com/2020/07/25/us/… This is the same malcolm_john who wrote with alarm in 2015 about “the dramatic expansion of federal power at the expense of the states, the people, and civil society.” Of course, that was about things like expanding health care, protecting public health and the environment, etc.

Jake Tapper asks about #ClimateChange and health. Bernie emphasizes impacts today and says we need to transform our energy system as soon as we can — and goes right to fossil fuel interests. #DemDebate Tapper follows up by asking Biden whether his plan is ambitious enough because it would cost $14 trillion less than Sanders. The ideal answer would be: “The measure of ambition is not how much money we spend, but how many tons we cut.” #DemDebate #climatechange

The lede of this otherwise excellent story by @SominiSengupta, as well as the headline on A1 in the print version, make it sound as if the US was responsible for the failure of #COP25. That may fit the conventional narrative, but it’s wrong. nyti.ms/2PLkJaU I’m told by a senior negotiator that the claim that the US blocked language on ambition is simply false: that was China & India. Having been in the USG, that rings true to me — and I know that enviro campaigners are often unduly paranoid about the US. But the issue runs deeper.

Three takeaways from #COP25, which ended earlier today in Madrid without a deal on major issues including carbon markets guidance under #Article6 of the #ParisAgreement on #climatechange: 1. #COP25 showed that the yawning gap between what citizens are demanding on climate action, and what UN negotiations are delivering, is wider than ever.

New #COP25 text on Article 6 (well, as of ~2 hrs ago). Finally, no options or brackets. In general, looks pretty good — although seems unlikely to be agreed. Details follow: 6.2: Robust accounting, including for emissions reductions both inside and outside NDC, as well as for other int’l uses (i.e., CORSIA). Strong reporting requirements. No share of proceeds — but that was never in 6.2 to begin with. Overall mitigation could be met with strong caps.

BREAKING: New #COP25 text on Art 6/carbon markets just released. Bottom line is that Article 6.2 on bilateral transfers is almost complete and looks strong. But 6.4 still has options and brackets so the outcome for environmental integrity still hangs remains in the balance. On 6.2, the text provides robust accounting guidance, including on the key issue of no double counting, covering all emissions reductions generated both inside and outside NDCs as well as those transferred for use for other purposes (i.e., airlines under CORSIA).

While we await word from #COP24, it’s worth being clear on the implications if Art 6 is left out of the decision (as looks likely). The bottom line is that countries can move ahead with international transfers even without guidance under Art 6.2 (1/4). PA Art 6.2 specifically recognizes that countries may use transferred mitigation outcomes toward NDCs — whether or not the CMA acts. The crucial phrase is “consistent with guidance,” which means that if guidance exists it must be followed — but action does not depend on guidance.

Xie Zhenhua at #COP23: China national carbon market is ready to go online as soon as it receives approval. Xie Zhenhua at #COP23: China open to int'l engagement on carbon markets; will focus on building its own market first and then consider links