Climate change protester Risipriya Kangujam takes the stage during the COP28 debate on December 11th
Dominika Zarzycka/NurPhoto via Getty Image
The COP28 climate summit in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, has gone into extra time, with a real possibility that negotiations will fail given how far countries are separated on the future of oil, gas, and coal. It has become a target. But whatever the outcome, this summit changed the way the world talks about fossil fuels and climate change.
“The calculations are being made for fossil fuels,” he says. David Waskow at the World Resources Institute, an environmental nonprofit organization. “This has put the issue front and center and changed the conversation around it, and I hope that will continue to be the case.”
At the summit, and in the months leading up to it, many countries and many civil society organizations lobbied for strong language on phasing out fossil fuels in any deal reached in Dubai. The phasing out of fossil fuels received unexpected attention near the end of last year’s COP27 summit in Egypt, but the role of fossil fuels in driving climate change as a major source of greenhouse gas emissions has never been more important. There has never been a COP with such continuous focus.
“Even a year ago, the historic debate on phasing out fossil fuels currently taking place at COP28 was completely unthinkable,” he says. Jonas Kuehl At the International Institute for Sustainable Development, Canada. “The joint efforts of nearly 130 countries and civil society forced them into a process that has been fruitless for many years.”
The draft core agreement, published on December 11, drew heavy criticism from a number of countries and organizations yesterday for not mentioning the phasing out of fossil fuels. However, the draft does mention the need to reduce the production and use of fossil fuels and makes two other references to these fuels. This alone represents a significant change from past summits, which referred to emissions but not major sources.
“This is the first COP to actually include the word fossil fuels in a draft decision,” he said. Mohamed Addo At Powershift Africa, a Kenyan energy think tank. “This is the beginning of the end of the fossil fuel era.”
Summit participants are fundamentally divided on what should be included in the agreement. High-income Western countries, as well as small island states and some low-income countries such as Colombia and Kenya, are demanding stronger language on ending the use of fossil fuels to be part of the agreement. We are united. But countries that rely on oil and gas revenues, and those that consider fossil fuel development essential to future development, oppose disqualifying language.
“The United States, Canada, and Australia are all fossil fuel producers, but they are all perfectly aligned with European countries,” he says. Andrew Deutz At the Nature Conservancy. “This puts even more pressure on fossil fuel producing countries.”
Countries that oppose language phasing do so for a variety of reasons. For example, the Group of African States, while not totally opposed to such an agreement, recognizes that any agreement would have different responsibilities and timelines for phase-out, and that it is important for countries to implement energy transitions. It claims to provide support to do so.
“Asking Africa to phase out fossil fuels is like asking Africa to stop breathing without life support,” Nigeria’s Environment Minister Isiak Kunle Salako said at a press conference at the summit on December 12. African ministers also emphasized the need for further support. This is to adapt to the climate change that is already occurring.
Nigeria is part of a group of oil-exporting countries called OPEC, and its members, especially Saudi Arabia, have been the strongest opponents of the phase-out. But the overwhelming focus on fossil fuels means it may not matter in the long run.
“I think because of the pressure from oil and gas interests, if we don’t agree to phase out fossil fuels here, it’s likely to be a pyrrhic victory for them,” he said. bill hare At the think tank Climate Analytics. “They would have kept it going, but they wouldn’t have stopped it.”
A complete failure at COP28 could help build momentum towards an unjust end to the fossil fuel era, Hare says. “Next year we’ll probably see more countries wanting to phase out fossil fuels, more countries thinking about it more and putting more pressure on oil and gas producers.”
topic:
Source: www.newscientist.com
