The COP26 UN climate talks in Glasgow have ended and insisted on the Glasgow climate agreement agreed by all 197 countries.
If the 2015 Paris Agreement provided the framework for countries to tackle climate change, Glasgow was, six years later, the first major test of this high-water mark of global diplomacy.
So what have we learned from two weeks of leaders’ statements, mass protests and favor deals over coal, fossil fuel finance and curbing deforestation, as well as the last signed Glasgow climate agreement? From phasing out coal to the loopholes of the carbon market, here’s what you need to know:
1. Progress on emissions reductions, but nowhere near enough The Glasgow Climate Treaty is incremental progress and not the moment of success needed to halt the worst effects of climate change.
The UK government as host and therefore the president of COP26 wanted to “keep 1.5°C alive” the strong goal of the Paris Agreement. But the most we can say is that the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C is on life support – it has a pulse but it’s almost dead.
The Paris Agreement says that temperatures should be limited to “well below” 2 °C above pre-industrial levels, and countries should “effort” to limit warming to 1.5 °C. Prior to COP26, the world was on track for 2.7°C warming, based on commitments by countries and expectation of changes in technology.
COP26 announcements, including new pledges to cut emissions this decade by some major countries, have lowered it to the best estimate of 2.4 °C.
More countries also announced long-term net zero goals. One of the most important was India’s pledge to reach net zero emissions by 2070.
Crucially, the country said it would make a quick start with a massive expansion of renewable energy over the next ten years so that it accounts for 50 percent of its total use, reducing its emissions by 1 billion tonnes in 2030 (by one From a current total of about 2.5 billion).
Fast-growing Nigeria also promised net zero emissions by 2060. Countries that account for 90 percent of the world’s GDP have now pledged to be net zero by the middle of this century.
A world warming of 2.4 °C is still clearly a far cry from 1.5 °C. What is left is a near-term emissions gap, as global emissions are likely to be flatline this decade, rather than what is needed to show the sharp reductions occurring on a 1.5°C trajectory. There is a difference between long-term net zero targets and plans to cut emissions this decade.
2. The door is open for further reductions in the near future. The final text of the Glasgow Treaty notes that current national climate plans, in jargon, are far from the nationally determined contribution (NDC), required for 1.5 °C. It also requests that countries come back next year with new updated plans.
Under the Paris Agreement, new climate plans are required every five years, which is why Glasgow was such an important meeting five years after Paris (with delays due to Covid).
New climate plans next year, instead of waiting another five years, could put 1.5°C on life support for the next 12 months, and give campaigners another year to shift government climate policy. It also opens the door to requesting NDC updates beyond 2022 to help meet the ambition in this decade.
The Glasgow Climate Pact also states that unabated coal use should be phased out, as should subsidies for fossil fuels. Due to last-second intervention and “inefficient” subsidies by India, the wording is weaker than in the initial proposals, with only “phase down” in the final text and no “phase out” of coal. But this is the first time fossil fuels have been mentioned in a UN climate negotiations declaration.
In the past, Saudi Arabia and others have removed this language. This is a significant change, finally recognizing that tackling the climate emergency requires a sharp reduction in the use of coal and other fossil fuels. The taboo of talking about the end of fossil fuels has finally been broken.
3. Rich countries kept ignoring their historical responsibility. Developing countries have been demanding money to pay for “loss and damage”, such as the cost of the effects of cyclones and sea level rise.
Small island states and climate-sensitive countries say historical emissions of major pollutants have caused these effects and are therefore in need of funding.
Developed countries, led by the US and the European Union, have resisted taking any liability for these losses and damages, and vetoed the creation of a “Glasgow Loss and Damage Facility” as a way to support vulnerable nations, Despite this, it is being sought the most. Country.
4. Flaws in carbon market regulations could undermine progress. The carbon market could throw up a potential lifeline for the fossil fuel industry, allowing them to claim “carbon offsets” and do business (almost) as normal.
A harrowing series of negotiations on Article 6 of the Paris Agreement on the market and non-market approach to trading carbon were finally agreed upon six years later. The worst and biggest loopholes were closed, but there is still room for countries and companies to sabotage the system.
Outside of the COP process, we will need more clear and strict rules for company carbon offsets. Otherwise expect a series of exposures from NGOs and the media to carbon offsetting under this new regime, when new efforts emerge to address and close these remaining loopholes.
5. Thanks to climate activists for the progress – their next move will be decisive.
It is clear that powerful countries are moving too slowly and have made the political decision not to support a step change in both greenhouse gas emissions and funding to help income-poor countries adapt to climate change and avoid fossil fuels. To help usher in the era.
But they are being hit hard by their population, and climate campaigners in particular. Indeed in Glasgow, we saw huge protests for the Future March on both Youth Friday and the Saturday Global Day of Action, which exceeded the expected numbers.
That means the next steps of campaigners and the climate movement matter. In the UK it is trying to block the government from granting licenses to exploit the new Cambo oil field off the north coast of Scotland.
Expect more action on the funding of fossil fuel projects, as activists try to cut emissions by starving the industry of capital. Without these movements pushing countries and companies, including COP27 in Egypt, we would not be able to curb climate change and protect our precious planet.
,