Amanda Ullman

Today’s morning presentation was one of my best experiences to date at COP24. Prior to arriving at COP24, I had garnered a great interest in Itaipu, the most powerful hydroelectric dam on the planet, thanks to conversations with a fellow Nicholas school student and a Nicholas School faculty member. Itaipu is situated between Brazil and Paraguay, and its power generation is governed by a treaty between the two nations. The dam itself powers 50% of Brazil’s energy needs and 91% of Paraguay’s. Use and development of its energy represents great opportunity for sustainable development within the two nations and has the potential to serve as a case study for developing Latin American nations.

During this morning’s presentation, representatives from both Paraguay and Brazil discussed the extensive efforts that their governments had generated on making Itaipu a hub for environmental conservation and sustainability. Not only does Itaipu produce clean energy for the country’s residents, it also serves as a biological safe haven for over 186 rare species, a hub for the world’s largest reforestation program, and a site for biogas and solar energy formation. Just having the chance to learn about how UNDESA and Itapiu Binacional partnered to create a global network to promote sustainable actions to reach SDG 6 (water access) and SDG 7 (energy access) was incredibly meaningful to me, so you can imagine the shock I felt when I saw Executive Secretary of the UNFCCC walk into the room. Her presence went above and beyond her initial presentation on the importance of reaching SDGs 6 and 7, as after the Itaipu presentation ended, she stayed and made a special announcement of a new global summit to take place in March 2019 to focus on the linkage of SDGs and NDCs.

Corey Sugerik

This week is absolutely flying by, and I finally got to attend my first negotiation sessions today for the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Paris Agreement discussing the topic of mitigation. One of my favorite sessions I attended today was led by the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) and discussed climate science and policy, which is the interface that I am most interested in for a future career. During the Q&A portion of the session, an audience member from the United States asked how US citizens and students specifically can bring science further into policy discussions when our administration denies the existence of climate change. Additionally, she asked how we can reach our goals of 2 degrees of warming if the United States does not do its part to reduce emissions. This is a very fair question and one that I have asked myself before. The panelists responded with sound advice that we should look within our own circles of influence and to look to cities and states to be the leaders in pushing towards reducing emissions. The representative from the IPCC concluded with the phrase “Every bit of warming matters. Every year matters. Every choice matters. Every life matters.”

Paelina DeStephano

Today, I went to a session on coal and just transitions. I’ve previously researched this topic in a US context, using a fairly quantitative approach. But the session today was an amazing mix of stories from activists and government officials in Eastern Europe. Each individual talked about how they managed to mobilize their community and find messages to communicate the benefits of a diversified economy. In some communities questioning mining operations was taboo, but when an economic shock made the future of the industry uncertain, people began discussing the need to diversify. Uncertainty and insecurity are alarming. Once people realized the size of subsidies propping up the coal industry, they felt less secure about those jobs. Diversification became an aim. The idea of a just transition has been contentious at this COP, with a strong feeling like it can be too easily co-opted by groups hesitant to transition. This event was an encouraging look at how impacted communities viewed coal and economic diversification.

Udit Gupta

SBSTA held an informal consultation on 3 draft texts relating to Article 6.8 of the Paris Agreement.

The parties said they hadn’t read any of it because it was released 3 hours prior. But everyone congratulated the co-chairs for pulling an all-nighter to deliver the text.

“We can be only at one place at a moment,” the delegation of Pakistan pointed out on the difficulty of managing multiple sessions. This seems fair, as most country delegations have anywhere between 5-20 members. And at any moment, there are 3-5 simultaneous consultations taking place. In response, the session chair pointed out that the schedules are arranged by subject matter – for example, the intention is not to schedule two Loss and Damage meetings at the same time, but, as the case today, it is not always possible.