Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate

From SourceWatch
Jump to navigation Jump to search

{{#badges: CoalSwarm| Climate change}}The Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate comprises a series of meetings, initiated by U.S. President Barack Obama in April 2009, with the stated aim of facilitating "a candid dialogue among key developed and developing countries, help generate the political leadership necessary to achieve a successful outcome at the UN climate change negotiations that will convene this December in Copenhagen, and advance the exploration of concrete initiatives and joint ventures that increase the supply of clean energy while cutting greenhouse gas emissions."[1]

In his announcement, Obama stated that the initial meeting would be held at the Department of State on April 27 and 28 in Washington, D.C., as a prelude to the Major Economies Forum Leaders' meeting hosted by Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi in L’Aquila, Italy, in July 2009.[1] U.S. Special Envoy for Climate Change Todd Stern will lead U.S. participation in the Major Economies Forum, and Deputy National Security Advisor for International Economic Affairs Michael Froman will serve as chair. [2]

The 17 countries participating in the forum account for approximately 80 percent of the world's greenhouse gas emissions.[3]

The discussions of the forum meetings found expression in two documents developed at the COP15 conference in Copenhagen, the Danish text and a later iteration of it, the Copenhagen Accord.

Controversy over the forum

Obama's "Major Economies Forum" represents a "modified version of the Major Economies Meeting started by President George W. Bush and attacked by some industrialized and developed countries," reported the Washington Post. "When Bush launched the series of talks, arguing that major emitters across the globe could benefit by meeting outside the formal U.N. climate negotiations, several foreign officials accused the United States of seeking to undermine the U.N. process." [4]

Earlier in 2009, South Africa's Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, Marthinus van Schalkwyk, "dismissed the major economies meeting process as dead." But Obama administration officials responded that "the talks could help forge a basis for a broader U.N. climate agreement in December, when negotiators will meet in Copenhagen to develop a pact aimed at cutting global greenhouse gas emissions." [4]

Others saw the Major Economies Forum as a chance for the United States to initiate face-to-face talks with China. Labeled as an Non-Annex I developing country under the Kyoto Protocol, China has not been directly subject to Kyoto targets and timetables. Its exemption was a major reason for former U.S. President Bush's refusal to sign onto the Protocol. Proponents of the Major Economies Forum see it as an opportunity for "the two most important carbon players, the United States and China, [to] speak directly outside of the negotiating blocs which have dominated the UNFCCC," or United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. [5]

The April 2009 meeting

Protest ahead of the meeting

Greenpeace protest near the State Department

Coinciding with the commencement of the Major Economies Forum, seven Greenpeace activists climbed a 140-foot construction crane near the meeting venue and unfurled banners stating that the Earth is "Too Big to Fail" (referring to the U.S. government's bailout of Wall Street) and that it's time to "Stop Global Warming" and "Rescue the Planet." In a media statement, Greenpeace called on the U.S. to take a lead in ensuring industrialized countries committed to interim targets of a 40 percent cut in greenhouse gas emission below 1990 levels by 2020, and at least 95 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. "If the United States doesn't take action that matches its responsibility, it's unlikely other countries will meet theirs: China will continue to build new, very dirty coal fired power plants, and tropical countries like Indonesia, Brazil, and the Congo will continue to allow giant agricultural interests to burn down their forests. And the climate will rapidly careen out of control," the Greenpeace release stated.[6]

The Major Economies Forum was opened by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. President Obama's science adviser, Dr. John Holdren, and Energy Secretary Steven Chu also spoke. The Australian government delegation promoted Carbon Capture and Storage and its recently launched Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute. Representatives from India discussed energy efficiency, especially in the building sector, and South Africa and Mexico made presentations on their national plans to address climate change.[7]

Clinton's address to the meeting

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton made the opening remarks at the Major Economies Forum on Monday, April 27, calling climate change "a clear and present danger to our world that demands immediate attention." She pledged that climate change is an issue in which the United States is "fully engaged and ready to lead and determined to make up for lost time, both at home and abroad." Clinton reiterated that the goal of the Major Economies Forum was not to pursue negotiations outside of the United Nations, but rather to provide "a vehicle to help us get prepared to be successful" at COP 15 in Denmark in December 2009.[8]

Clinton also pointed out emphatically that "the science is conclusive" in regards to climate change. She said the Obama administration was "making climate change a central focus" of its policy, and pointed out that as of April 17, when the Environmental Protection Agency announced its finding that that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions threaten public health and welfare, the U.S. was already making steps towards that promise. While countries around the world today are faced with economic hardship, that's not an "excuse to delay action," Clinton said, but "an opportunity to move toward a low carbon future."[8]

Clinton also addressed one of the major issues in climate change negotiations, and a large reason the United States failed to sign onto the Kyoto Protocol in the first place: the responsibility of developing countries to reduce emissions. Clinton stated that while the U.S. supports allowing developing nations' "economies to grow," she hoped developing and developed nations could "work together in a way to avoid the mistakes that we made that have created a large part of the problem that we face today." Whether this means the U.S. position would require actual reductions targets for nations like China and India is unclear.[8]

Statements at the conclusion of the meeting

At the conclusion of the Major Economies Forum, Michael Froman presented the chairman's summary, which provided little detail on the discussions beyond a general sketch of long-running discussions in the negotiations leading up to the COP15 meeting. "Participants commented on the potential for the Major Economies Forum to support the development of transformational technologies critical to mitigating climate change globally. Many in the group noted that the forum could provide valuable support and impetus at a political level for the development of critical technologies and supported exploring cooperation on innovation and policies to enable deployment of technologies, including carbon capture and storage, clean coal, buildings, energy efficiency, solar energy and biofuels, among others. The role of legal and regulatory systems in facilitating enabling environments was also raised. "Delegations were invited to submit concrete proposals for cooperation to facilitate discussions at the next preparatory meeting," it stated.[9]

A U.S. government press conference on the Major Economies Forum featured both Todd Stern and Froman. Stern described the first meeting as having been a "trust building" exercise. "That does not change the fact that the issues are extremely difficult, that it's not going to be easy to reach agreement, or we wouldn't be doing this. And I don't think any of that changed, but I think that the nature of the discussion, the substantive quality of the interactions, the frankness of the interactions, was all quite encouraging," Stern said.[7]

"An issue for us is always an agreement that you can get ... that can produce consensus internationally and it can also be approved back at home," Stern said.[7]

Lisa Friedman from ClimateWire asked what the reaction of other countries was to statements that the U.S. would not commit to the greenhouse targets of 25 to 40 percent below 1990 levels for the Annex I countries, as set out in the Bali Action Plan. "People expressed their views. We expressed our views. Some people agreed with us, some people pushed back with -- on us, we pushed back on them," Stern responded.

In a separate briefing, Senator the Hon. Penny Wong, the Australian Minister for Climate Change and Water, was upbeat about the Major Economies Forum and its potential role in protecting the future of the coal industry. "Australia was very pleased to be asked to present on carbon capture and storage. Obviously this is one of our priority areas as a government for two reasons. One is, globally, you cannot reduce emissions by the amount the climate needs without a low emissions technology for coal. That's why carbon capture and storage is so important. And the second reason is of course it's in Australia's national interest as the world's largest exporter of coal to find a technology for coal that reduces emissions whilst recognising it will continue to be an important source of energy," she said.[10]

The May 2009 Meeting in Paris

The second meeting of the forum was held in Paris between May 25 and 26th.[11]

Associated Press journalist Angela Charlton reported that at the meeting France and Germany criticized the United States for its low emissions reduction target. French Environment Minister Jean-Louis Borloo said at the conclusion of the meeting that those present had supported a proposal from Mexico on the issue of financing adaptation to global warming.[12]

In a summary statement on the talks, the U.S. State Department stated that "participants discussed a wide range of mitigation issues, including a peak year, the notion that countries will reflect their actions through various baselines, low-carbon strategies, aggregate goals, mid-term and long-term emission targets (including an ambitious 2050 goal for developed countries), and the readiness and capacity of economies to undertake mitigation actions and to raise the global level of ambition, in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities. They noted that developed countries should have ambitious mid-term targets as a way to define pathways towards long-term emissions goals. There was interest in assessing a mid-term aggregate goal for developed countries. Participants discussed the need for the major developing countries to build on the effective national actions they have already taken with enhanced national actions. Participants also discussed proposals for reflecting domestically binding low carbon actions, the character and reviewability of such actions, and promoting transparency. In addition, there was discussion of how offsets and the carbon market could contribute to the overall level of ambition."[13]

On the issue of financing adaptation, the U.S. State Department stated that "Mexico presented its proposal for a Green Fund, which generated substantial interest ... Participants shared the view that financing should derive from multiple sources, public and private, domestic and international, including carbon markets, and that existing institutions should be utilized. Many stressed the desirability of predictable funding in the context of developing country actions in the 2020 timeframe. They confirmed the importance of facilitating the matching of resources to needs and of accountability for the use of resources. There was a convergence of views that governance should be transparent, fair, effective and efficient, and involve balanced representation. Participants agreed on the importance of adaptation to climate change, and the need to provide support, especially for the most vulnerable countries."[13]

The State Department also noted that "a number of countries outlined their proposals for specific areas of focus, including bioenergy, carbon capture and storage and power plant efficiencies, renewables, energy efficiency, and smart grids. Participants will have further discussions to define objectives in these areas. There was interest in adding further specificity to the proposals and for articulating the role of the Leaders in advancing the transformation of these key technologies."[13]

The June 22-23 meeting in Mexico

The Chairs' summary of the meeting stated that "discussion on mitigation focused on such issues as long-term goals, mid-term targets, peaking years, and low-carbon growth plans, consistent with the science. Many Leaders’ representatives expressed support for agreeing to a global long-term goal by 2050 in the context of a specific developed country 2050 goal, and robust mid-term actions for developed countries. There was discussion of the importance of mitigation actions by all, taking into account equity and national circumstances, and the development of low-carbon growth plans. There was a clear view on the importance of financing, and discussion about various possible financing concepts, including the Mexican Green Fund proposal. There was broad interest in exploring proposals for possible fast-track funding to address specific mitigation and adaptation challenges."[14] (Emphasis added)

"On adaptation, participants recognized the need for enhanced support for developing countries which will be disproportionally affected, and discussed supporting formulation and implementation of adaptation programs and their integration into national development plans. Many noted the special needs of Africa and small island developing states. On technology, there was a determination that major economies have a key role to play to drive innovation in transformational low-carbon technologies. Countries called for discussions on removing barriers, establishing incentives and sharing best practices, technology transfer, and substantially increasing public investments in research, development, and demonstration of such technologies," the summary stated.[14]

At the conclusion of the meeting, the U.S. Special Envoy for Climate Change Todd Stern, signaled that on financing, the U.S. government preferred the Mexican Green Fund proposal rather than the Norwegian proposal. "I think the Mexican proposal is quite a good one. And the Norwegian proposal is also an interesting proposal. The way it’s set up causes, is kind of more amenable to some countries than others."[15] Asked specifically about why the U.S. thought the Mexican Green Fund proposal was interesting, Stern said that "one of them is that it would take advantage of the existing experienced institutions, that the Mexican idea would involve using an institution like the World Bank, I am not sure it has to be the World Bank , but an institution that’s got some experience. I think they have good notions about governance which in our view ought to be fair and balanced between developed and developing countries, and they have good ideas about accountability of funding and they have a very interesting idea actually, it’s a big focus I know for President Calderon, is that all countries should contribute, including developing countries, except the poorest developing countries."[15]

Leader's Meeting of Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate Forum

The July 2009 G8 summit featured a parallel leaders meeting of the Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate Forum, which was intended as the culmination of the earlier preparatory meetings in Washington, Paris and Mexico, made few additional commitments. There was no agreement on setting specific emission reduction targets for either 2020 or 2050, sources of funding for adaptation or technology transfer. "Public policy is not keeping up with what the science is telling us we must do," said Reid Detchon, vice president for energy and climate at the United Nations Foundation in Washington, in a statement.[16]

The Leaders declaration

The Leaders Declaration included few additional commitments.[17] The declaration stated that:

  • "Developed countries among us will take the lead by promptly undertaking robust aggregate and individual reductions in the midterm consistent with our respective ambitious long-term objectives and will work together before Copenhagen to achieve a strong result in this regard"
  • "Developing countries among us will promptly undertake actions whose projected effects on emissions represent a meaningful deviation from business as usual in the midterm, in the context of sustainable development, supported by financing, technology, and capacity-building";
  • "The peaking of global and national emissions should take place as soon as possible, recognizing that the timeframe for peaking will be longer in developing countries, bearing in mind that social and economic development and poverty eradication are the first and overriding priorities in developing countries and that low-carbon development is indispensible to sustainable development";
  • "We recognize the scientific view that the increase in global average temperature above pre-industrial levels ought not to exceed 2 degrees C."
  • "In this regard and in the context of the ultimate objective of the Convention and the Bali Action Plan, we will work between now and Copenhagen, with each other and under the Convention, to identify a global goal for substantially reducing global emissions by 2050."
  • "We will take steps nationally and internationally, including under the Convention, to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation and to enhance removals of greenhouse gas emissions by forests, including providing enhanced support to developing countries for such purposes."
  • On adaptation, the declaration blandly stated that "Further support will need to be mobilized, should be based on need, and will include resources additional to existing financial assistance. We will work together to develop, disseminate, and transfer, as appropriate, technologies that advance adaptation efforts."
  • "We are establishing a Global Partnership to drive transformational low-carbon, climate-friendly technologies. We will dramatically increase and coordinate public sector investments in research, development, and demonstration of these technologies, with a view to doubling such investments by 2015, while recognizing the importance of private investment, public-private partnerships and international cooperation, including regional innovation centers. Drawing on global best practice policies, we undertake to remove barriers, establish incentives, enhance capacity-building, and implement appropriate measures to aggressively accelerate deployment and transfer of key existing and new low-carbon technologies, in accordance with national circumstances. We welcome the leadership of individual countries to spearhead efforts among interested countries to advance actions on technologies such as energy efficiency; solar energy; smart grids; carbon capture, use, and storage; advanced vehicles; high-efficiency and lower-emissions coal technologies; bio-energy; and other clean technologies. Lead countries will report by November 15, 2009, on action plans and roadmaps, and make recommendations for further progress. We will consider ideas for appropriate approaches and arrangements to promote technology development, deployment, and transfer."
  • On financing, the leaders declaration made no specific commitments other than setting out broad principles for additional funding. It also stated that "we agreed to further consider proposals for the establishment of international funding arrangements, including the proposal by Mexico for a Green Fund."

A statement by the White House largely reflected the official G8 declaration but stated that through the "Global Partnership", the participants agreed "to spearhead efforts on technologies through the leadership of the following countries:

  • The United States on energy efficiency;
  • Germany on solar energy;
  • The Republic of Korea and Italy on smart grids;
  • Australia and the UK on carbon capture, use, and storage;
  • Japan and India on high-efficiency and lower-emissions coal technologies;
  • Canada on advanced vehicles;
  • Germany, Denmark and Spain on wind; and
  • Brazil and Italy on bio-energy."[18]

Fourth Meeting in Washington, D.C., September 2009

The fourth meeting of the forum was held in Washington between September 17-18, 2009 with representatives of the seventeen member companies as "well as the United Nations and Denmark". The summary of the forum indicates that a limited range of topics were covered. The main topics were [19]:

  • adaptation: "Participants agreed that, while adaptation actions need to be domestically driven, many of those most impacted by climate change also have the least ability to respond. The group also discussed the importance of observations and early warning systems as tools for adaptation, and the need to significantly scale up funding in the near term";
  • how to incorporate national actions in an agreement: "Australia explained its “schedules” proposal as flexible and compatible with other approaches, and in which all countries could reflect their targets, pathways, or actions. The Republic of Korea shared its “registries” proposal designed to provide international recognition for unilateral domestically binding actions, and serve as a tool for measuring, reporting, and verifying actions";
  • Measuring, reporting and verifying (MRV) actions: "The concept of expert teams and peer reviews was raised, as well as the importance of full information to ensure the world is on the right trajectory. The importance of enhancing capacity to enable appropriate MRV actions and of building on existing systems was highlighted. There was discussion about the range of actions to which MRV would apply."

Fifth Meeting in London, October 2009

At the fifth meeting, in addition to the leaders of the seventeen developed countries were "ministerial observers from Lesotho and the Maldives participating in the session, and additional observers from Bangladesh, Costa Rica, Ethiopia, and Norway." The meeting also had presentations from Lord Stern and Nobuo Tanaka, the Executive Secretary of the International Energy Agency, "on pathways to stabilize concentrations at 450 ppm or limit temperature increase to 2 degrees C."[20]

Following the fifth meeting in London, the "Chair's Summary" outlined the major developments at the meeting as including:[20]

  • "that significantly scaled up financing will be important;
  • on the need for substantial public finance in addition to the private sector and carbon market;
  • that public finance should take advantage of various financial tools to leverage significant investment that would not otherwise occur;
  • that there are opportunities for the private sector to invest in least developed countries;
  • that consideration should be given to a new fund and better use of existing mechanisms, possibly with multiple windows to support adaptation and mitigation, including technology and capacity building, governed in a balanced and equitable manner under the guidance and accountable to the Convention’s Conference of the Parties (noting the distinction between political and operational issues), and designed to improve access to financing while respecting fiduciary standards;
  • that existing delivery mechanisms should be reformed to be more effective and efficient;
  • that increased predictability in the provision of finance was desirable;
  • that funding should be in accordance with national priorities and consideration given to further use of programmatic approaches;
  • that there should be further discussion on the level of finance;
  • that G20 finance ministers should advance these discussions at their St. Andrews meeting in November.

On mitigation, the summary stated that the discussion "focused on two distinct issues: how to "internationalize" mitigation targets/actions ex ante in some kind of listing; and how to report on and review their implementation in a transparent manner. On listing, it was considered that it would be necessary to reflect the mitigation efforts that countries intend to take, with developed countries reflecting emission reduction targets and developing countries reflecting actions. Further consideration could be given to various options for listing intended actions, including the Australian schedules proposal and the Korean registry proposal."[20]

On the topic of transparency and accountability of national mitigation actions "it was noted that review of developed country targets would look at implementation of quantitative outcomes and review of developing country actions would look at implementation of such actions. The use of national communications for transparency and accountability was noted; it was also noted that the frequency, timeliness, and content of national communications could be improved ... It was considered important to design both listings and transparency mechanisms to respect the sovereignty of countries."[20]

At the Leaders dinner, the summary noted, "the need for urgently and significantly scaled up international finance for REDD+ was discussed, ahead of linkage to the market. Such finance could be for capacity building, to leverage private sector investment and for payment by results, accommodating different national circumstances. It was suggested that existing institutions propose investment instruments and how to improve coherence."[20]

Todd Stern's press conference

In a press conference at the conclusion of the meeting, Todd Stern was asked whether the U.S. could unveil more ambitious targets at Copenhagen beyond those ones in the climate change legislation before the Senate. "Look, I think we will certainly be guided by what is done in our legislative process. One of the things we do not want to do is repeat the process that we went through in Kyoto where a number was agreed to essentially in a domestic policy vacuum. There was no foundation laid in the domestic arena and we don’t want that."[21]

Later in the press conference, Stern made clear the U.S. position of preferring an agreement quite different to the Kyoto Protocol. "You’re right, we are not particularly interested in the Kyoto Protocol as a model. This is a very different issue for the parties to the Kyoto Protocol. We’re not a party to the Kyoto Protocol and we’re not going to be a party to the Kyoto Protocol, so our focus is on a good strong agreement that includes the necessary elements and stands on its own feet," Stern said.[21]

"I don’t know that I can speculate exactly on a legal form. We’re looking for an agreement that captures the essential points. The mitigation actions in the midterm, generally regarded as the 2020 period, by the developed countries and the major developing countries. We think that actions be, as I said before, reflected in something like a schedule or registry or appendix or annex. It doesn't matter what it’s called, but something that captures where countries list what they’re going to do. There needs to be a package, provisions for financial assistance, for technology, for forests, for adaptation," he said.[21]

Kathy Newman, from Channel 4 News asked Stern whether he agreed with "Gordon Brown that the planet does face a catastrophe if there is no deal at Copenhagen, or would you use slightly less apocalyptic language?" Stern evaded the question, preferring to prise Brown for having taken a leadership role in the debate on climate change. Immediately afterwards, he was asked "Are we facing [inaudible]?" (though it appears from media reports the missing word was "catastrophe")[22], Stern dismissively said "You should ask a scientist."[21]

Unveiling Technology Action Plans at COP15

At the start of the COP15 meeting, Obama announced the public release of ten Technology Action Plans developed in line with the decision of the third meeting of the MEF. "To put these recommendations into immediate action, the President has asked Energy Secretary Steven Chu to intensify cooperation with his counterparts both in MEF countries and around the world," a White House media release stated.[23] The MEF stated that "the United States is planning to invite energy ministers and other relevant ministers from MEF countries, as well as other countries actively working to advance climate-friendly technologies under the Global Partnership, to meet and discuss how to promote progress in these areas."[24]

The ten technology action plans focus on:

Role of the MEF after Copenhagen

Alden Meyer from the Union of Concerned Scientists noted that the way the accord was negotiated had created considerable uncertainty about where future negotiations would occur. "It remains to be seen whether elaboration of the Accord takes place under the auspices of the UN process, through other multilateral processes such as the Major Economies Forum (MEF) launched by President Obama or the G-20 Economic Summit meetings, or most likely, through some combination of the two. After last Friday's events, fears in Europe and Japan that the future climate policy landscape will be determined in a "G-2" process involving only the U.S. and China don't seem so far-fetched," he wrote.[25]

Participants

Those countries participating are:

Obama also stated that Denmark, as host of the COP15 conference, and the United Nations have also been invited.[1]

Contact details

Website: http://www.majoreconomiesforum.org/

Official statements

Articles and resources

Related SourceWatch articles

References

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 Barack Obama, "President Obama Announces Launch of the Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate", Media Release, March 28, 2009.
  2. ↑ "Major Economies Forum on Climate Change" US Department of State, Bureau of Public Affairs, accessed April 2009.
  3. ↑ Lisa Friedman, "U.S. will 'lead the way' on int'l climate plan, Secretary Clinton says", New York Times, April 27, 2009.
  4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 Philip Rucker and Juliet Eilperin "Obama Sets International Climate Change Forum", Washington Post, March 28, 2009.
  5. ↑ "Rise of the Green Dragon?" Center for American Progress, April 28, 2009.
  6. ↑ Greenpeace, "Planet Earth: Too Big to Fail: Greenpeace action in nation's capital calls on world leaders to tackle global warming", Media Release, April 27, 2009.
  7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 7.2 Todd Stern and Michael Froman, "Special Briefing on Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate", U.S. Department of State, April 28, 2009.
  8. ↑ 8.0 8.1 8.2 Hillary Rodham Clinton, "Remarks at the Major Economies Forum on Climate Change" US Department of State Publication, April 27, 2009.
  9. ↑ Michael Froman, "Chairman's Summary from the First Preparatory Meeting of the Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate", U.S. Department of State, April 29, 2009.
  10. ↑ Senator the Hon. Penny Wong, Australian Minister for Climate Change and Water, "Climate Change", Transcript, Department of State, Washington DC, April 29, 2009.
  11. ↑ "Today in France - May 26", Reuters, May 26, 2009.
  12. ↑ Angela Charlton, "Help for poor countries at Paris climate talks", Associated Press, May 26, 2009.
  13. ↑ 13.0 13.1 13.2 U.S. State Department, "Second Preparatory Meeting of the Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate Chairs' Summary", Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs, May 26, 2009.
  14. ↑ 14.0 14.1 "Chairs' Summary: Third Preparatory Meeting of the Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate", Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs, U.S. State Department, Jiutepec, Mexico, June 23, 2009.
  15. ↑ 15.0 15.1 Todd Stern, "Third Preparatory Meeting of the Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate", Jiutepec, Mexico, June 24, 2009.
  16. ↑ Peter N. Spotts, " Nations pledge to fight global warming - but without specifics", Christian Science Monitor, July 9, 2009.
  17. ↑ "Declaration of the Leaders: The Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate", G8 Summit 2009, July 9, 2009.
  18. ↑ The White House, "Meeting the International Clean Energy and Climate Change Challenges", Media Release, July 9, 2009.
  19. ↑ "Chair's Summary: Fourth Meeting of the Leaders' Representatives of the Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate", Washington, DC.
  20. ↑ 20.0 20.1 20.2 20.3 20.4 "Chair's Summary: Fifth Meeting of the Leaders' Representatives of the Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate", U.S. Department of State, Washington, DC, October 20, 2009.
  21. ↑ 21.0 21.1 21.2 21.3 Todd Stern, Special Envoy for Climate Change, "London Meeting of the Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate", London, United Kingdom, October 18, 2009.
  22. ↑ "Britain, US insist global climate deal can be done", Sydney Morning Herald, October 20, 2009. (This is an AFP story).
  23. ↑ Office of the Press Secretary, "Statement by the Press Secretary on the Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate Global Partnership", The White House, December 14, 2009.
  24. ↑ "Statement of the Chair of the Leaders’ Representatives of the Major Economies Forumon Energy and Climate on Global Partnership Technology Action Plans and Clean Energy Analysis", media release, Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate website, undated, accessed January 2010.
  25. ↑ Alden Meyer, "The Copenhagen Accord: Not Everything We Wanted, But Something to Build On", Union of Concerned Scientists, December 23, 2009.

External resources

External articles

Retrieved from "https://dev.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Major_Economies_Forum_on_Energy_and_Climate&oldid=456783"