By: Sophia Rathleff
Thursday 11th November - Cities, Regions and Built Environment
Thursday 11th of November came as a continuation of Wednesday’s talks on transportation, with some, albeit random, additions to conversation topics. As the final day to introduce new ideas and give a final push on controversial issues, Thursday was busy in every area.
Things to take away from today
One, a group of countries and organisations have joined the Glasgow Decoration on Zero Emissions Cars and Vans, to accelerate the transition into zero-emissions vehicles by 2040. This comes after the UK confirms its commitment to past pledges on prohibiting the sale of new petrol/diesel vehicles.
Two, the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) has released the first proposal for a sustainable financing plan. This could act as a skeleton for states and organisations to build off of to ensure funding goes to where it is needed and that it is the sufficient amount. This would ensure poorer nations have the infrastructure available to not only cope with climate change but counteract it as well.
Three, another unlikely pair, Denmark and Costa Rica, have announced their “Beyond Oil & Gas Alliance”, which highlights their commitment to stop the domestic production of these products. They will do this by stopping the issuing of new permits, which will eventually phase their domestic use out. It also announced new members to this commitment, which include France, Ireland and Sweden.
Four, Major US airlines and Amazon have announced a joint effort to curb aviation emissions by 2050. They have committed to a coordinated effort to accelerate development and the use of sustainable aviation fuels (SAF). This would mean major reductions in global emissions, through the sustainable aviation byers alliance.
In conclusion, not much new but major steps have been taken in aviation and finance. It all depends on how far they are willing to go with commitment and implementation.
To put it in Prime Minister Boris Johnson's words, leaders need to “go further” tomorrow to be able to make a difference. The entire success of this summit lies on the outcome of tomorrow's discussions. Consensus building will be key, but this could lead to problems with weak wording or clauses being struck. Only tomorrow will tell...
Sources:
Friday 12th November (+ Saturday 13th) - Closure of Negotiations
Summary
After a long (long) two weeks, COP26 finally came to an end after extending an extra day to finish discussions. The document leaders have been working towards is the Glasgow Climate Pact, which condenses the outcomes of the summit. Almost all decisions are taken by a consensus, due to the procedural protocols, which means all participating parties must be in agreement. This is the reason for the extension as some parties were unhappy with certain wording, which can determine the overall outcome of a clause or declaration. Overall, the consensus had been reached for the Pact and it was published on Saturday the 13th of November. Some call it a success, some a failure and others are unsure, but this declaration determines climate outcomes until 2030 regardless.
Things to take away from the summit
Failures and shortcomings
One, coal. In the last minute bid, India prevented consensus by submitting a request to amend wording. They weakened the wording from “phasing out” coal usage to “phasing down”. This allows space for nations that currently do not have the funding to phase out coal entirely but, as it applies to every nation, it allows too much space for wealthier nations to continue with coal usage. This could prove detrimental to reducing global warming to the 1.5 goal. Though on Friday, countries, including Norway and Costa Rica, opposed this effort.
Two, once again wealthier nations failed to provide adequate funding to aid poorer countries in their climate action plans. The $100 billion a year by 2020 has already failed, and once again they haven't placed any implementation plans within the Glasgow Climate Pact. This is detrimental to these nations and could inhibit progress made towards the 1.5.
Three, activists and civil society were locked out of the summit, some even arrested for gathering near it. This is a major step back in terms of responsibility for the future, as we will be shouldering this issue when the current leaders kick the bucket.
Four, the declaration does not make any historical acknowledgment for states impact on emissions and climate change. Notably, there was no blame put on the biggest emitters while they encouraged smaller nations to work harder on climate change. This needs to happen as a major step towards global cooperation to tackle climate change.
Five, Australia won the “Colossal Fossil “ award for its abysmal performance at COP. with the US coming in second for excessive “hot air” and the UK in third for their shambles of a COP26 summit.
Successes and hopes for the future
One, nations agreed to review and adjust their nationally determined contributions to global emissions by 2022, reducing the time to meet every two years. This will hopefully bring stronger action and genuine implementation plans start to take place towards the end of this year and the start of next year.
Two, after a considerably rocky start, China and the US’s cooperation was a pleasant surprise. Depending on how long they keep their commitments up, this could spell real hope and progress for global climate action.
Three, the considerable steps are taken to counteract deforestation earlier in the summit held up to the end. Including $14 billion of private and public funds from Brazil, the global commitments to deforestation will lead to considerable flourishing for the global natural environment.
Four, the cuts on methane emissions that over 80 countries have pledged to can be considered the most successful outcome of the conference. This pledge committed to cutting methane emissions by 30% by 2030. This included a significant proportion of the world’s top methane emitters.
Five, there has been some improvement when it comes to climate finance, notably the agreement to plan a layout for long term funding and the increase in yearly funding. However, this agreement barely has implementation and finance targets have consistently failed by wealthier nations.
Summary
A few good things have come out of this summit, with more promise than in future years. The work of deforestation has been notable, with some transport pledges holding promising outcomes. Any action is better than none, that will always be the case, but inaction that feigns action is so much worse. As a result, the summit's lukewarm policies have not lived up to the standard many fear we desperately need. But Sadly, the 2030 NDC’s have been assessed by four different organisations but they have found that these will lead to a 2.4-degree global warming. This means there will have to be dramatic and sudden changes in policies within the next decade to be able to counter the effects.
Many experts and activists have called this summit a failure and that it has stuck too close to the status-quo, laid out at the Paris Agreement. But in all honesty, the status quo is no longer good enough, it is nowhere near good enough. Leaders can no longer sit idle and keep using climate change meetings as a PR opportunity. If they want to make a tangible change they need to turn their faces away from the cameras and towards science. Confront the economic issues, confront the scientific and technological developments needed and confront the fact that climate change is a result of our actions. They need to listen to their youth, our present and future, and to their scientists, who continue to plead with leaders. We know what is coming if we don't act, and they know too, they are just choosing the easy way out and to put profit over people. It is difficult and complex, it will always be difficult and complex. But, every major step we take, away from fossil fuel use and away from profiting over the destruction of the environment, is a step towards untangling this knot.
We have a future to protect, they are our key to making it possible. It is not just down to us, because frankly it doesn't matter how many plastic straws or bags we save or how many reuse and recycle programs we run if there are companies actively pumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere at alarming rates. Leaders need to tackle those corporations and take the economic blows that will follow because there will always be a cost. We are balancing on the edge and we can't afford to stall anymore. The COP26 summit was a disaster on many fronts, and a disaster we can no longer afford. From the inaccessibility to the inaction, leaders will have to do much better because by the time it passes to us, there won't be a torch left.
sources :
Comments