COP28: a long-awaited oasis?

Climate disasters may inflict costs of $400b on developing nations by 2030

ISLAMABAD:

The four-pillared roadmap laid out in the COP28 letter to parties reads like a dream – a sprawling vision with wide-ranging ambitions, from fast-tracking energy transition to fixing climate finance, from focusing on adaptation to protect lives and livelihoods to inclusivity.

Yet, as we grapple with the increasingly grim realities of a climate crisis, this utopian canvas is both exhilarating and terrifying because the question looming large is whether these lofty goals will be met or end up as just another page in the tragicomedy of climate politics.

Let’s start with the impending Global Stock Take (GST). Positioned as the centerpiece of COP28, this is a five-yearly review mandated by the Paris Agreement to assess collective progress towards battling climate change.

However, it is more than just a review; it is a “moment for course correction,” an opportunity to increase ambition to avoid the worst impacts of climate change.

Yet, the recent “technical dialogue” at the Bonn Climate Change Conference, the third and final in the series, was a stark reminder of the complexities in aligning diverse national interests towards our unified global climate goal.

Despite its intent to facilitate the exchange of the best available science and climate solutions, crucial agenda items, such as the GST, Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA), and the hosting of the Santiago Network for Loss and Damage, among others, did not see much progress.

A sharp divide emerged between developing and developed nations over financial flows and the historical responsibility of developed nations. Countries like Saudi Arabia and China advocated for a change in priority, pushing for implementation to supersede financial considerations. In contrast, developed nations staunchly opposed this reordering.

Tensions intensified when the subject of developed countries’ historical carbon emissions came to the fore, leaving a contentious cloud hanging over the proceedings. The agenda was only approved after bypassing the divisive Mitigation Work Programme (MWP) put forth by the European Union.

Instead of a formal agenda point, the MWP was reduced to an informal note, addressing developing nations’ concerns about setting new emission reduction targets without providing implementation strategies.

Unless the UAE presidency has learnt from past fiascos and has a robust plan to sidestep such roadblocks, the GST might just be the new flashpoint in COP history.

The second pressing matter to consider leading up to COP28 is the intricate process of operationalising the loss-and-damage fund.

Intended to support victims of climate disasters, this fund was heralded as the great saviour at COP27. However, progress on the actual operationalisation remains slow, including deciding on the fund’s financial sources, the methods of disbursement, and the intended beneficiaries.

The urgency of this process cannot be overstated, with climate-related disasters potentially inflicting an annual cost of at least $400 billion on developing nations by 2030.

Despite the efforts of the transitional committee, which was established to develop both the fund and other “funding arrangements” to support pertinent action, no clear consensus has emerged.

Bonn showed developed countries advocating for a funding approach that draws from various sources, including multilateral development banks, insurance schemes, and humanitarian organisations, while developing nations hold out for a UNFCCC-operated fund, primarily sustained by grants instead of loans.

At the same time, a pivotal decision is yet to be made – the future host of the Santiago Network, a critical support mechanism for developing countries.

The choices are between Nairobi’s UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction and the Caribbean Development Bank. However, with no conclusive decision made, this topic will be pushed forward to COP28.

Furthermore, the question of the Santiago Network’s independence looms large as the body prepares to provide crucial technical assistance on loss and damage. As we approach COP28, the world awaits these critical decisions, underscoring the pressing need for effective action against the escalating climate crisis.

COP28 is also wrestling with an unexpected opponent – calls for a boycott over the UAE’s fossil fuel interests.

Given the UAE’s enormous investments in energy and gas, significant tensions between climate action and the fossil fuel industry were inevitable leading up to COP28.

COP28 team has responded to this criticism by emphasising the significance of fossil fuel companies’ participation in the energy transition.

COP28 President-designate Dr Al Jaber has emphasised the need for an integrated approach that considers supply and demand simultaneously, stating that the “phase-down of fossil fuels is inevitable.”

However, the language used by Al Jaber around phasing down fossil fuels appears ambiguous, teetering on the brink of obscurity.

It’s alarming that there seems to be implicit permission for the continued extraction of fossil fuels, albeit seemingly greenwashed with carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology. But can we afford to bank on unproven and controversial CCS methods, backed mainly by fossil fuel industries, while the planet continues to warm?

According to a research by the US National Academy of Sciences, capturing one gigaton of carbon dioxide per year could necessitate up to 3,889 terawatt-hours of energy. IPPC chair Hoesung Lee warns that overreliance on CCS technology could mean the world misses the 1.5-degree Celsius target.

The inclusion of fossil fuel executives in COP28 discussions is another area of contention. Yes, the largest producers need to be part of the solution.

Still, there’s a valid concern that their involvement could lead to token changes in operations while profits continue to soar, thus maintaining the status quo.

Given the criticism Al Jaber faced due to his links with the national oil company, one cannot help but question the impartiality of this approach.

Climate finance is another crucial issue to be addressed at COP28. Many developing nations disproportionately impacted by climate change lack the means to transition their economies to low-carbon pathways.

Al Jaber’s call for transforming the World Bank and other international financial institutions and including private-sector finance, alludes to the possibility of progress. However, we have traveled this path before.

COP15’s pledge of $100 billion annually to developing countries remains largely unfulfilled, highlighting the persistent disparity between words and deeds.

Countries like Pakistan exemplify the essential need for robust climate finance mechanisms. As Pakistan bears the burden of climate impacts despite contributing marginally to global emissions, COP28 must ensure that Islamabad’s voice and the concerns of comparable nations are heard and addressed.

With its promised potential, the blueprint for COP28 navigates a terrain riddled with the potential pitfalls of previous COP shortcomings. The harsh reality is that our planet is rapidly overheating while diplomatic talks wade through a perpetual sandstorm of indecision.

We need COP28 to not only set the pace for consigning fossil fuels to history, as Alok Sharma hopes, but to enforce a just, equitable, and inclusive transition.

Our collective survival hangs in the balance, demanding COP28 be more than another mirage of promises. It must serve as an oasis of immediate, actionable solutions to the escalating climate crisis.

The writer is a sustainability and climate risk (SCR) professional, passionate about sustainable energy consumption and climate change

 

Published in The Express Tribune, July 31^st, 2023.

Like Business on Facebook, follow @TribuneBiz on Twitter to stay informed and join in the conversation.