In Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, the United Nations Climate Conference (COP27) is about to end and – as always happens close to the closure of events of this type – the various delegations are late in preparing the document shared between participating countries on how to continue their efforts to limit global warming and mitigate its damage. For the second consecutive year, after the COP26 in Glasgow, Scotland, there is the impression among observers that the final document will not contain major surprises and progress, with the risk of further wasting precious time to address the climate emergency whose effects are increasingly evident.
Friday 18 November is formally the last day of COP27, but as happened in the past, the work will continue at least until Saturday, before arriving at the publication of the new commitments. The discussion is mainly focusing on two topics: the establishment of a compensation fund for the poorest countries most affected by climate change; a commitment to significantly reduce the use of fossil fuels in addition to coal, in order to release smaller quantities of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, the main causes of global warming, into the atmosphere.
Fossil fuelsLast year’s COP26 in Glasgow began with a certain optimism about the possibility of establishing a clear and shared plan on the elimination of coal as a source for producing energy. Coal is among the cheapest fossil fuels, but it is also among the most polluting especially in relation to its yield.
The more economically developed countries were almost in agreement on the elimination of coal, also because its use had significantly decreased in recent years. The largest and most powerful developing countries, such as China and India, were against it, because they still use many coal-fired plants to produce electricity, especially to fuel their industrial activities. During the negotiations a stalemate was reached and the only solution was to change a wording in the final document, no longer speaking of “elimination” but of “reduction” of coal consumption.
Complicating things in the last year was the significant increase in the price of natural gas, which in some cases made it necessary to make greater use of coal to produce electricity. Despite the temporary nature of this situation, the increase still has an impact on energy policies and the transition to the massive use of sustainable sources.
(Spencer Platt/Getty Images)
At COP27 it was discussed to extend the concept of reduction not only to coal, but also to other fossil fuels such as oil and natural gas. In this case, India and several other countries are asking for the extension, while other developed countries that still depend heavily on gas and oil would like to find different formulations. It is probable that for this reason the final document does not contain references on fossil fuels very different from those of the final agreements of COP26.
CompensationsIn addition to fossil fuels, the issue that has led to the greatest divisions and frictions among delegations at COP27 is the establishment of a system of economic compensation for the poorest countries most exposed to the effects of climate change. The possibility of setting up a fund for this purpose has been discussed for several decades, but has never led to anything concrete so far.
The richest and most developed countries, ie a large part of the West, believe that a compensation system could keep them busy for decades if not more than a century. The idea is that it is in fact the countries that have polluted the most up to now to compensate the others, which will not be able to benefit from the same polluting solutions (and often cheaper than sustainable ones) for the development of their productive activities. The fund should be used to finance activities to mitigate the effects of climate change, such as floods, increasingly extreme atmospheric events or prolonged periods of drought, also offering resources to manage the energy transition, i.e. the transition to less polluting energy sources.
The United States are not in favor of a real fund: they argue that direct aid initiatives are more useful without the constraints that a collective initiative, perhaps coordinated by the United Nations, would entail. Joe Biden’s government has partially softened this position, but no clear declarations for greater commitment have emerged from the negotiations in Sharm el-Sheikh.
Aftermath of a flood in Sukkur, Pakistan in 2010 (Daniel Berehulak/Getty Images)
After having postponed the issue for a long time, the European Union in recent years has shown itself more open to the possibility of setting up a fund to manage compensations. Availability is, however, subject to the participation of other large countries in the initiative, starting with China, one of the largest producers of carbon dioxide in the world, together with the United States and the European Union. European requests are also bound to the inclusion in the final document of clear commitments on reducing the consumption of fossil fuels and on keeping the increase in the global average temperature below 1.5°C compared to the pre-industrial era.
1.5°CAt COP27 there was also much discussion of the 1.5 °C limit, established in the Paris Agreement seven years ago as a desirable and preferable scenario to that of a 2 °C increase. At COP26 it was decided to keep the goal among the commitments, with a declaration indicating that this was “alive, but with a very weak heartbeat”. At the beginning of this year’s conference, the UN secretary general, Antonio Guterres, had used much more alarmed and sharp tones, saying that humanity is “on a highway towards a climatic hell with one foot on the accelerator ».
Many experts and observers believe that it is increasingly unlikely to meet the goal of not exceeding 1.5 °C, given that climate change is now inevitable and underway. At the same time there is the awareness that any initiative to reduce an overshoot as much as possible is precious, given that just a 2°C increase would have very serious effects for many ecosystems, with a large reduction in polar ice, the sea level to the point of making large coastal areas uninhabitable and at the same time the drying up of many cultivated areas, causing millions of people to migrate, because the coasts are among the most inhabited areas on the planet.
There draft of the final document of the COP27 on which the delegations are discussing in the last hours of the conference does not contain very different references compared to the Paris agreement which spoke of the need to remain “well below” 2 °C and to commit the as much as possible to keep below 1.5 °C. An excessive emphasis on 2°C in the document could lead some countries to relax their policies to reduce the production of greenhouse gases, with a further slowdown towards the goal of “carbon neutrality” or “zero emissions”, whereby for every ton I say2 or another greenhouse gas that diffuses into the atmosphere removes as much.
Greenland, 2021 (Mario Tama/Getty Images)
In the draft of the document there are references that suggest that industrialized countries should reach zero emissions by 2030, instead of 2050 as established for some years. However, it seems unlikely that similar references will also remain in the final version, considering that the 2050 deadline is already seen by analysts as extremely optimistic. According to the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), global greenhouse gas emissions are expected to be reduced by 45 percent in 2030, compared to 2010 levels.
The countries most skeptical about the possibility of keeping the increase in global average temperature below 1.5°C are India and China, both of which have a strong impact on environmental policies, also due to the influence they have on other countries. Even before the start of COP27, many experts had expressed concerns about a possible revision of the targets linked to the increase in temperature.
ChinaAs for several years at the climate conferences, China was among the countries observed with the most attention at the COP27. In the years of strong opposition to Donald Trump, when he was president, relations with the United States had deteriorated significantly and consequently it had become more difficult to find common policies against global warming. Now relations with Joe Biden have begun to improve, as seen in the recent meeting between the US president and the Chinese president Xi Jinping, but there is still no shared plans that can act as a model for other countries as well.
The handshake between Chinese President Xi Jinping and US President Joe Biden, before their expected meeting today in Bali, Indonesia, on the sidelines of the G20 (EPA/XINHUA /LI XUEREN)
For some time now, the United States would like China to no longer be considered a developing country, and which can therefore count on a certain type of treatment with regard to emissions, but as a substantially developed country with a strong economy. According to some forecasts, by the beginning of the next 1930s, China could surpass the United States in terms of the total carbon dioxide emissions historically produced by the two countries. A redefinition of China is linked to the possibility that the country makes greater contributions to the compensation fund, as also requested by the European Union.
