To The Moon

The prophecy was fulfilled, and what had to happen finally happened. The summit failed miserably, since the agreements reached do not serve the objectives set at the beginning of the Summit to recover the environment.

The final agreement of COP28 reflects the intention of countries to make the transition from fossil fuels “in a fair, orderly and equitable manner.” But the terminology used is vague, both in language and objectives, and falls far short. Those who win in this summit are the countries that produce fossil fuels, and the companies that transform and sell them, the most powerful and richest on the planet.

They are the ones who have paid for the trips on 800 private jets that transported the 2,400 lobby lawyers and delegates related to the coal, oil and gas industries, who have been insistently pressing to redirect the agreements to the interests of their clients. There were more than the government representatives.

The final agreement is the third version presented in approximately two weeks, the result of the bidding between those who called for the “phasing out” of fossil fuels — more than 100 countries advocated for this — and the call for the “reduction” of their use, which was what was finally approved. It is also a consequence of the leadership of Sultan Al Jaber, chosen by Dubai as president of COP28, accused of using the summit’s preparatory meetings to favor his country’s agreements on oil and gas exploitation. I already warned in this medium that you cannot put a fox to take care of the chickens.

“This is a real victory for those who are pragmatic, results-oriented and guided by science,” declared Al Jaber, who is also director of the state oil company ADNOC. The president of COP28 had already said that “there is no science” to show that the elimination of fossil fuels is necessary to limit global warming. His management at the meeting was supported by the presence of 2,400 delegates related to the coal, oil and gas industries. They were more than the government representatives, and they have widely and deservedly earned their high salary and the bonuses they will receive for the objectives achieved for the oil companies.

While some celebrated their success (not that of the Summit), António Guterres, Secretary General of the United Nations, who has been demanding urgent action for years, spoke of “delays”, “indecisions” and “half measures”. «To those who opposed a clear reference to the phasing out of fossil fuels… I want to say that it is inevitable, whether you like it or not. Let’s hope it doesn’t come too late,” Guterres said after learning of the final agreement.

This year is expected to end with a record number of emissions: about 40.9 billion tons of CO₂, the main polluting gas that causes the greenhouse effect. The majority of these emissions are caused precisely by the burning of fossil fuels.

This is the first time that countries have agreed to declare that the transition away from fossil fuels is necessary. But that’s where the history ends. The document does not establish obligations for governments, clear limits or a calendar of actions.

What happened then for the Summit to end in failure?

Well, the document asks “the parties to contribute” with a list of climate actions, “according to their national circumstances”, and proposes “tripling renewable energy capacity” and “doubling average energy efficiency” annually between now and 2030. If this were achieved, it could reduce oil demand by 25% by the end of the decade, estimates the International Energy Agency.

But…

A draft released on Saturday considered the option of a “phasing out of fossil fuels in accordance with the best available science.” Delegations from the United States, the European Union and several island countries defended the proposal, but risked no agreement being reached. The nearly 200 countries had to give the go-ahead — or at least not object — or the summit would end without a joint declaration.

Meanwhile, the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) urged its partners to oppose any condemnation of fossil fuels. Thus, on Monday they moved from “phasing out” to a version that said nations should “reduce the consumption and production of fossil fuels in a fair, orderly and equitable manner.” For this reason, the final declaration on the energy “transition” was celebrated by some activists, taking into account that it could have been worse.

The group of small island nations objected to some aspects of the text, but agreed not to undo the COP28 agreement. These countries are one of the most dramatic faces of the climate crisis. Celebrating what happened would be like “celebrating the flowers that will rest on our grave,” Brianna Fruean, a renowned Samoan activist, told the BBC.

She Fruean explained that what has been agreed will not prevent the limit of 1.5 ° C of global warming from being exceeded, the base objective of the Paris Agreement, signed in 2015 by almost all nations. She highlighted that the survival of the islands is at risk. This 2023, the global average sea level reached its historical maximum.

Regarding the transition process from fossil fuels, the agreement only establishes that “action in this critical decade” must be accelerated. And she repeats a commitment with a distant goal that had already been mentioned before: zero emissions by 2050, “in line with science.”

This lukewarm proposal does not correspond to the dark balance contained in the same COP28 document. The countries recognize in the text that to prevent warming from skyrocketing above 1.5 °C, “deep, rapid and sustained reductions” in gas emissions are needed. They mention what the scientific community has already repeatedly warned: they must be reduced by 43% by 2030 and 60% by 2035, compared to the 2019 level.

But what has been proposed so far is very far from this goal. According to the document, polluting gas emission levels are only projected to fall by 5.3% in 2030. This, if the reduction plans presented by governments are fully implemented.

Definitely…

It is clear that from the side of the producers and oil companies, there is nothing to do. What is achieved later, if anything is achieved, will have to come from the citizens and their climate awareness. Only by increasingly and constantly rejecting or reducing the consumption of unsustainable energy and fuels will it be possible to change market conditions by reducing demand, and the business will end up not compensating for the costs that the use of fossil fuels entails.

El artículo se puede leer en español en este enlace.