COP28: Consensus on phasing out fossil fuels may elude Dubai summit

The parties (nations) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) agreed in 2015 to contain global warming to within 2 degrees Celsius compared with preindustrial times and make efforts to limit it to 1.5 degrees.

Striving for consensus

The ongoing 28th Conference of the Parties (COP28) is expected to take a hard look at where the world stands on climate action and support, identify the gaps, and agree on possible solutions. All decisions at the summit have to be reached through consensus, which means objections by even a single country, however small, can derail the entire process.

Country representatives, UNFCCC officials and other stakeholders are preparing draft documents on various other aspects including just transition and climate change mitigation and adaptation. These will be placed before the ministerial groups, which will try to arrive at a consensus and produce a final political document called the cover text that would delineate the outcomes of this year’s summit.

Meeting the aims of the Paris Agreement and “keeping 1.5 degrees within reach depends on the leadership and support” of all nations, Sultan Ahmed Al Jaber, president for COP28, said in a statement.

There are deep fault lines to be negotiated as the Global South, led by countries including India, pushes the international community to commit to phasing out all fossil fuels and secures commitments from wealthy nations to provide more funds so that vulnerable countries and communities can grapple with the impacts of the climate emergency.

Some progress

The annual meeting has already made some progress. Chief among them is the decision to operationalise the loss and damage fund, which will help countries to deal with the impacts of climate breakdown, something that had long been a sticking point in negotiations. Just after the announcement that the funding arrangements to deal with extreme weather and slow onset events was agreed, the United Arab Emirates, the host to the talks, pledged $100 million.

Wealthy countries primarily responsible for the climate crisis have so far pledged a total of $700 million. However, this represents 0.2 percent of the irreversible economic and non-economic losses that developing countries face from global warming every year, according to an estimate by the Loss and Damage Collaboration, a collective of non-profits.

There were other declarations and pledges, notably the Global Renewables and Energy Efficiency Pledge to bolster clean energy, which was endorsed by almost 120 countries. India did not sign because it linked boosting renewables with the phasing out of coal-fired energy, something that is non-negotiable for the country that still relies heavily on it.

The Declaration on Sustainable Agriculture, Resilient Food Systems and Climate Action that was signed by 134 nations is a significant step in recognising the need to transform global food systems, but was criticised for not mentioning clear targets. India refrained from signing this as it conflicted with its longstanding policy of not committing to climate action related to agriculture and livestock, and the millions of livelihoods that depend on these sectors.

The third key development was the Declaration on Climate and Health, which marked a departure from keeping the health impacts of the climate emergency languishing on the sidelines of global negotiations despite ample scientific evidence and the ground reality of the adverse effects. India did not sign this too, a surprising development, for reasons that were not immediately clear other than its reluctance to engage in pledges outside formal negotiations.

Dancing with words

The pledges and declarations are outside the official process of the UN summit and are not legally binding. The so-called cover text that will come out of various sectoral drafts will be all that matters as it is considered a political statement that global leaders would find hard to wriggle out of.

An early draft version of the inventory document moots a plan to “phase out fossil fuels,” which is expected to be the most contentious. The draft will go through several modifications as negotiators thrash out issues and smoothen differences.

As in every climate summit, it will boil down to a few keywords that fuel tensions and determine whether the summit is a success or failure. The phrases that will gain prominence will be ‘phase down’ and ‘phase out.’
Most developing and vulnerable nations demand that the final document mention the phase out of fossil fuels within a given time frame. That is easier said than done as there has barely been any progress on this count at past summits.

At the 2021 Glasgow summit, countries agreed to “phase down coal” and not all fossil fuels. In Egypt, more than 80 countries rallied behind the demand to expand the phrase to include all fossil fuels, but failed.

The phrase could be softened to phase down, which will face objections from oil-producing nations such as Saudi Arabia, which has been a staunch opponent to any mention of eliminating the use of fossil fuels, however slowly.

India’s stand

Another word that trips up agreements is the use of the word “just” – as in just transition or climate justice. Climate justice promotes the idea that the developed world has become wealthy from fossil fuels and should transition away from them faster than developing nations, which are poorer and have fewer options to develop economically.

Yet another sticking point has been setting a deadline for the reduced use of fossil fuels, which climate scientists have repeatedly emphasised will have to be implemented to stop catastrophic climate change. The issue will feature predominantly at the negotiating table.

India’s stand on most of the important issues has been clear and consistent. It will be chary of linking any emission reduction targets to the phasing out of coal. Its strategy would be to expand the phase down of coal to include all fossil fuels, officials said. It has emerged as a leading voice of the Global South; whether it succeeds in rallying more countries to its cause remains to be seen.

In the remaining days of the climate summit till December 12 there will be increased parleys to arrive at a consensus. If past years are any indication, the ultimate political outcome statement could overshoot the deadline. The past meetings have delivered compromises that have pleased no one and have done little to contain the climate emergency.