Article 6.2 allows countries to conclude bilateral and voluntary agreements on trade in carbon units. Countries must agree on a way to ensure a “total downturn” in the market. There is, however, disagreement on the three types of market (6.2, 6.4 and 6.8) that are determined by this principle. In the text of the Paris Agreement, only Article 6.4 contains this objective. More progressive trading blocs argue that all markets must respect this principle or that the system is distorted. According to Emilie Alberola, Article 6 of the Paris Agreement is the most “sensitive and technical” provision, it remains the only article not to be finalized, even if investors are eagerly awaiting the adoption of the new rules. A lack of agreement on solving this problem reflects the technical challenges it poses and not the political differences on the appropriate solution, says former co-chair Kizzier. Article 6 is divided into eight paragraphs and the rules for implementing three of these paragraphs have been the subject of several iterations over the past two weeks. Prior to Schmidt`s speech last night, there was already broad consensus on the rules for paragraphs 6.2, which cover bilateral trade and the accounting of emissions reduction units, and 6.8, which cover non-market-based transfers. If an agreement cannot be reached, the issue will continue in December next year towards The Cop26. The precise approach to avoiding the use of emissions reductions by more than one country is one area of significant divergence. It is closely linked to the idea of double counting within the meaning of Article 6.2, with both questions being asked about what is considered “internal” and “outside” the scope of a country`s PNNMs, with some commitments covering only part of the economy. If there is no agreement by the end of COP25, the issue will be transferred to COP26 in Glasgow in December 2020, so that the UK will advance diplomatic progress to get it through.
“It`s hard to imagine how countries will agree on the right options and the right accounting rules and methods, when we can`t even have an agreement to eliminate those that are clearly incompatible… I mean, it`s not even a climate atmosphere, in many cases it`s common sense. The 25th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change ended today without agreement on Article 6, which governs international emissions trade. However, several countries have vowed to move forward bilaterally and multilaterally. More information about the new publication of our articles can be found in our reproduction policies. Perrez said there was enough agreement on the rules in paragraph 6.2, which covers bilateral trade and accounting for emissions reduction units, to move forward. This reduction means that emissions and red lines can be exchanged for each other, while negotiators seek to reach agreement on the article 6 regulatory framework. There may also be attempts to link these discussions to other COP political priorities, further complicating matters. Last December, an agreement was close to reaching an agreement in Katowice, Poland.