There is guarded optimism here in Paris that the climate talks will end well. The question is only how well. The Text of the climate agreement is now in the hands of the Ministers, with their staff having completed a draft of it on Saturday.  

Here is a quick look at where things stand on the negotiations, as well as the “other COP" going on here – where most attendees seem to not care if they ever talk to a negotiator but where they have plenty to say to each other.

The negotiations

The first sign that things were going to be serious this time around was an announcement made by UN Climate Chief Christiana Figueres that government delegates made up 20,000 of the attendees at the talks, while the NGO observers and media only made up 10,000. She said this was the highest ratio ever and interpreted it as I would: That governments saw a need to be there because an agreement was likely.

The best sign for me that things were going well came on Friday night. I had to the opportunity to attend a small dinner put on by the U.S.-based Business Council on Sustainable Energy (BCSE), one of the lead Business NGOs that works with the delegates and the negotiators. As is always the case when inviting VIPs, one hopes that they actually come. In the case of the lead negotiators, the expectation had to be lower, because they were scheduled to work through the night to get their Draft Text ready to hand over to the COP President for formal conveyance to the Ministers for final negotiations.  

But just before dinner, in walked the lead negotiators from numerous countries, including the Co-Chair of the Working Group that has been in charge of sheperding development and completion of the Draft Text. Their presence alone demonstrated good news, and their remarks to the group were positive as well. There was a congratulatory mood in the air.

During the dinner, I sat beside the chief negotiator for one of the large countries that has not been an early mover in making commitments, and has been vocal about the importance of recognizing its need to grow its economy and provide energy access to its citizens, most of which do not have it today. I talked about the looming rise of air conditioning, in addition to basic energy access, in his country and how challenging that will be. He acknowledged the issue but was very conversant in the opportunities that demand response/smart grid present and saw them as the right way, and low-emissions way, to develop. We talked a lot about microgrids.  

As for reaching an Agreement, he talked a lot about the funding that would be needed to help countries, not only his, to do things right – both reduce emissions and grow an economy. Most importantly, he agreed with my characterization of the climate agreement as a “vehicle” for reducing emissions and creating and distributing funds to help developing countries. In Washington-speak, a vehicle is often the key thing, I said. Once it exists, the gas pedal can be stepped on and more fuel can be added in response to needs and conditions, without having to go back and create a new vehicle from scratch.

As Monday begins, I cannot find any negotiator or insider-type NGO who thinks that there will not be an agreement at the end of this week. But there are key components for which the details are important and there is still time for argument and debate – and, potentially, for watering things down. An example of such a key provision is the review of progress towards fulfilling commitments. In other words, what kind of tracking and monitoring process there will be to assure that none of the 184 countries that offered their commitment before this COP will actually do what they have said. This gets to the issue of trust and transparency, words you will hear in conversations with just about anyone here.

Another example is one that always matters in an agreement – money. Everyone here thinks the funding announcements on Day 1 of the COP were good, but not enough. With the Climate Funding commitments made in Copenhagen to help developing nations not fully funded, and with no country wishing to fork over too much before someone else does, the money issue will be key this final week. The fact that the Republican-controlled Congress in the U.S. has threatened to block any such funding gets mentioned here, and not just by the U.S. folks.

Finally, there is a lot of talk about carbon pricing relative to the Text. There is a general statement acknowledging the policy mechanism in the Text that came into the COP, and a number of NGOs are trying to make that stronger. Outside of the negotiating rooms, carbon pricing has been talked about a lot, and the efforts of California, Ontario and Quebec (and Manitoba, which just joined with those provinces in their trading program) are cited in many presentations and conversations.

The 'other COP'

While there is a high number of credentialed attendees (30,000) at the Paris climate talks, there are tens of thousands more attendees here at side-events. There is so much going on in so many places that it is mind-boggling.

For example, there is an entire conference within a conference that a number of business organizations are putting on inside one of the giant halls. The groups, including the International Emissions Trading Association (IETA) and the International Energy Agency (IEA), are putting on stellar sessions separate from the UNFCC Side Events that are partly aimed at impacting the Text of the Agreement and partly aimed at facilitating business understanding, advocacy and deal making. Many nations have their own pavilions with full day programs of presentations and speakers. There, hundreds of NGOs from around the world have exhibit booths staffed by experts to talk to. Even the UN has two tracks going on.

In addition to the official side events, the Lima-Paris Action Agenda, a pathway to channel solutions into the overall implementation of all facets of the agreement, has its own multi-day, full day set of meetings and presentations. But that is only in the Blue Zone.  

There is also Le Gallerie, a trade show that features top-level exhibits from major companies and organizations, and which also has an all-day, every-day set of presentations. Then there is the Green Zone, also known as the climate generations area, where there are many exhibits and meetings sponsored by organizations focused on youth, environmental health, women, energy efficiency, social behavior, and more. Starting today, there is also a full conference inside the Green Zone called Caring for Climate, a business forum sponsored by the UN Global Compact.  

But wait, there's more: Starting today there are 5 different conferences/events starting up in downtown Paris.

So what is happening at all of these things? There is certainly a lot of information dissemination and sharing, as well as a lot of business-to-business and business-to-government networking. 

One of the reasons that I started coming to COPs is that not all of the delegates attending from countries are negotiators. Many members of a foreign delegation are there to learn what other countries are doing so they can bring ideas and solutions back to their country and implement them. These delegates are not the negotiators, but the designers and implementers of the climate action plans that a country will be pursuing. Think of it like the Clean Power Plan in the US. There is the top level policy (CPP), but then each state has to develop a plan to implement it. It's the same with a UN Climate Agreement.

Just as in the U.S., I am here to talk to people, especially foreign delegates, about why they should look at smart grid, demand response, microgrids, and distributed energy resources as tools to put into their climate plans – both for purposes of climate mitigation and climate adaptation/resilience. 

I have made two formal presentations at events so far, and it was these types of delegates that were most interested in hearing about what is happening in the U.S. in these areas. Some had their eyes opened. One energy ministerial staffer from a key central European country was fascinated to learn more about demand response, and he attended both of my presentations just to get clearer on things.

Panels at the Official UN Side Events have included talks on renewable energy and energy efficiency, as one would expect. But their presentations could be said to be the “same old," which has been a problem at recent COPs. Many are still stuck thinking that those are the only two buckets. This is primarily, in my opinion, a case of the country representatives being much more likely to come from an environmental than energy ministry.

Yesterday, one panel showed that the delegates may want more than that. After the type of presentation I mentioned above, a delegate from Kenya took the Q&A session opportunity to say that for her country they needed energy storage and that they also needed to think about energy access. One of the speakers on the panel was from Schneider Electric, who had actually talked a bit about microgrids during her presentation, and she expanded on smart grid technology solutions. After the session ended, she had quite a few people who wanted some of her time.

The example of Schneider and microgrids is not the only example I have run into here on that topic. 

In a typical COP encounter, I was eating lunch and catching up on some work, when some environmental ministry representatives from two different developing countries sat down at my table in succession. As we chatted about our respective work, there was immediate interest in talking about microgrids, particularly as a means of improving energy access for their citizens.

Another topic showing up in both official and unofficial side events is carbon assets, and the stranding of them. Lead person on this topic is none other than former Vice President Al Gore, who seems to be everywhere in Paris. In his talks, he combines his climate credentials with his financial/investment experience to talk about climate change in business terms and the need for businesses with carbon-related assets — utilities and others — needing to recognize what is happening, and plan and act accordingly.

In short, the Paris climate talks are not just about the negotiations. It is about networking and educating key audiences on countless different aspects of climate change mitigation and adaptation. It is about influencing many different stakeholders, many of whom will in turn be an advocate with their particular country representatives. Finally, it is about learning — a lot — fire hose-style.

That's my quick snapshot on what it is like to be at the Paris climate talks as a smart grid advocate. It is exhilarating and rewarding, and I can’t wait for the remainder of my time here.