The Tradeshow at the End of the World

"Let's all promise to meet again next year and try again, shall we?"

 

The 28th Conference of the Parties to the Framework Convention on Climate Change is over. People place a lot of weight on COPs, and well they should, but they need to remember the purpose is to talk and that’s all. Action is left to the parties — meaning the member nations of the UN, not what happens in the delegates’ penthouse suites. Those who want “enforceable” dictates need to think about how they would get 195 countries to agree to be told what to do by someone they did not elect, and punished if they don’t.

Most of the parties, or partygoers, are laggards and that’s the real problem. They get together at COPs and set aspirational targets for the sake of humanity. A few, mostly the Nordics, Germany and some island nations, actually exceed them. The majority talk a good game but duck out when the workday starts.

I wrote here last week:

Ever since Eleanor Roosevelt conceived of it, the United Nations has been a watering hole, not a battlefield. It does not have its own army. It can’t force those who sign its treaties to abide by them. Roosevelt saw the value, however, of being able to talk. To negotiate. To set a North Star in the sky. Can we all agree that genocide is bad? Can we establish laws of war? A Law of the Ocean? A Convention on Biodiversity? A Framework Convention on Climate Change by which we come together each year and set targets and ratchet ambition, even if we lack the power to enforce? To quote the Executive Secretary, “Parties must know what is needed to put NDCs (Nationally Determined Goals) on a pathway to reduce emissions by 43% by 2030, and 60% by 2035.”

While COP agreements are not legally binding, they send a signal to banks, governments and investors, shaping global policy.

 

The Great Change is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

 

If you are told Earth is not already 1.5 or 2 degrees warmer, always ask what baseline year is being compared.

 

 

Got Gas?

The COP28 methane agreement is a good example of COP producing results and member states then promptly backtracking. US Presidential Climate Envoy John Kerry rose to the podium, patted himself on the back for having helped negotiate a “commitment” of 155 members, and promised the US would do its part by halting gas flaring, plugging abandoned wells and mines, and repairing leaking wellheads and pipelines — reducing methane emissions 30% by 2030.

“I just remind everybody here our pledge is to reduce methane by 30% globally by 2030 — well, if we do that as we’ve been told by the IEA — that is the equivalent of every car in the world, every truck in the world, every ship in the world, every airplane in the world, all going to zero emissions by that period of time. So it’s ambitious, but it’s doable”

Thirty by thirty (30x30) is the slogan. There is just one hitch. If reducing methane emissions 30% is really that huge in comparison to cars, trucks, ships and planes, then what about the 70% still being emitted after 2030? Doesn’t that pencil out to more than double present emissions from all those sources? Let’s stop patting ourselves on the back for long enough to get a little perspective, shall we?

At the start of the second week of the COP, the UN Secretary-General, Antonio Guterres, gave his own assessment. I thought it was spot on. He acknowledged some accomplishments but he pointed to the harder work of acting, not just talking.

The global stocktake must offer a clear plan for a tripling of renewables a doubling of energy efficiency and the single-minded focus on tackling the root cause of the climate crisis — fossil fuel production and consumption…

He said these things don’t just happen by themselves. He said governments — and it does not matter if they are in the Netherlands and Belgium or Suriname and Congo (notice here I’ve named historic exploiters or wealth-gainers and their corresponding historic exploited or wealth-donors), they can take positive steps by supporting training and social protection (safety nets) for those who may be negatively impacted, even while shutting down mines and refineries.

In UN speak, this is called “a just, equitable and orderly energy transition for all.”

…a transition that takes into account the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities considering national circumstances, not to reduce ambition but to combine ambition and equity.

The SG said the big emitters (John Kerry, that is your country) need to make extra efforts to cut emissions and the wealthier countries (John Kerry, that is also your country) have to support emerging economies to be able to do so.

The timelines and targets might be different for countries at different levels of development but they all must be consistent with achieving Global Net Zero by 2050 and preserving the 1.5 degree goal.

Words come cheap. I expected to see language of this sort in the final document, as is the norm. I was disappointed to hear the word, “net” coming from the SG’s mouth. But Guterres was not done pointing his finger. He had pointed it at Kerry and the oil countries. Now he pointed it at the World Bank and IMF.

We need all commitments made by developed countries on finance and adaptation to be met fully and transparently and we need increased capital and reform of the business model of multilateral development banks to massively increase direct support and leverage — far more private finance at reasonable cost for developing countries’ climate action efforts and we need far more adaptation ambition.

Translated, he said, stop the 7-trillion annual subsidy going to fossil fuels. Stop charging 3% interest to German and Italian companies and 30% to Ghanaian or Colombian. Stop issuing mortgage insurance on beachfront condos. Start offering incentives for coastal communities to pack up and move inland, to higher ground.

This call-out of the banksters was really one of the most important statements to come from COP-28 but it went largely unnoticed. Money is a fiction. Physics, nature, or climate do not care one iota. Currencies are IOUs on the resources of future people. Every dollar or euro issued is a debt that will come due. And yet, Guterres reminds us, there is no transparency in the system. There is no one taking responsibility. Calling it a house of cards in a stiff breeze does not begin to describe the danger.

I welcome the emerging consensus for a new framework on adaptation with a set of measurable targets to proper action but a framework without the means of implementation is like a car without wheels.

The SG then took questions from the press and the first one, from BBC, was right on point:

BBC: Mr Guterres if we don’t get a commitment to phase out fossil fuels in this deal does that mean this COP conference has been a failure?

SG: Well, the COP covers many aspects and it depends on the global balance but a central aspect in my opinion of the success of the COP would be for the COP to reach a consensus on the need to phase out fossil fuels in line with a time framework that is in line with the 1.5 degree limit. That doesn’t mean that all countries must phase out fossil fuels at the same time. The principle of common but differentiated responsibility is applied. It means that globally, the phase-out of fossil fuels needs to be compatible with net zero in 2050 and with the limit of 1.5° in temperature rise.

Translation from UN speak: “Yes.”

Breaking that down, by 2030, six years from now, the atmosphere must have 22 gigatons — twenty-two billion metric tons — less greenhouse gases (in CO2 equivalence) than today. That is compatible with the IPCC pronouncement on the science for 1.5°C.

Let’s consider that. Once it’s added to the atmosphere, CO2 hangs around for between 300 to 1,000 years. Other gases may take shorter or longer to decay but CO2 equivalence provides a benchmark. As an average, about 2.5% of the CO2 in the atmosphere is removed by natural processes every year. Nature sequesters 7.85 GtCO2e/y, or about 8 billion tons per year. In one year — 2023 — humans added about 50 billion additional tons CO2e. We will do likewise next year, and the year after.

To be able to sync up with nature’s cleaning crew (and assuming they don’t just decide to quit or strike, as they’ve been threatening), we’d have to curtail annual emissions by 85%, not the 43% being called for by IPCC or the 9% increase pledged in current national voluntary reduction plans. That is a pretty big disconnect. The real estate market for caves is booming.

Final Text

So what did the final document say? We asked Fiona Harvey, climate reporter for The Guardian since COP15-Copenhagen in 2015 to give us the blow-by-blow.

An initial text proposed “reducing both production and consumption of fossil fuels.” This was couched merely as one of a list of options that countries “could” act on.

Many [over]developed countries are publicly pushing hard for a phase-out of coal, oil and gas — but with caveats such as “unabated” or just coal, in the case of the US.

Saudi Arabia and a few allied countries are in a small minority that have publicly raised strong objections to the inclusion of any reference to reducing the production and consumption of fossil fuels in the text of a potential deal.

A second draft, put forward in the wee hours of the evening before the last day, mentioned neither fossil fuel phase-out nor phase-down, but the deletion was not entirely the fault of OPEC countries. Said Mohamed Adow, the director of the Nairobi-based energy and climate thinktank Power Shift Africa.

Rich countries say they want a global phase-out of fossil fuels, but they are refusing to fund it. There is simply not enough in the current text for [under]developing countries to believe there will be finance to help them decarbonize.

Greenpeace spokesperson Rebecca Newsom said,

What these dynamics make clear is that to really unlock the talks in Dubai, countries like the UK, US, EU, Japan, Canada and Australia need to urgently get their own house in order and significantly ramp up the public finance needed to deliver the genuinely fair and ambitious package that the world wants and needs.

To applause, John Kerry told the others in the room the language on fossil fuels in the text “does not meet the test” of keeping 1.5 alive.

I, like most of you here, refuse to be part of a charade… This is a war for survival.

The final version coming in overtime kept Kerry and other critics on board. It said:

Conversation

Social media comments of participants and observers were as expected:

Al Gore @algore:

The decision at #COP28 to finally recognize that the climate crisis is, at its heart, a fossil fuel crisis is an important milestone. But it is also the bare minimum we need and is long overdue. The influence of petrostates is still evident in the half-measures and loopholes included in the final agreement… Whether this is a turning point that truly marks the beginning of the end of the fossil fuel era depends on the actions that come next and the mobilization of finance required to achieve them.

Simon Still @simonstiell (UNFCCC Executive Director):

#COP28 needed to signal a hard stop to fossil fuels and their planet-burning pollution. We didn’t turn the page on the #fossilfuel era, but this is clearly the beginning of the end. We must get on with the job of putting the Paris Agreement fully to work. We must ask ourselves how much longer will the world have wait before all nations summon the political will to overcome these narrow special interests and act on behalf of the future of humanity. It is up to all of us to hold our leaders accountable to their promise to transition away from fossil fuels once and for all.

Christiana Figueres @OutrageOptimism:

With the letter of ‘unstoppable transformation’ presented to the Presidency last week, we saw a reinvigorated multilateralism — with a groundswell of leaders from across regions and sectors standing in solidarity to show support for delivering what the science requires. There is a recognition that COPs are just part of the shift that needs to happen. The transformation doesn’t originate from the COPs, it is already happening in the global economy and will be accelerated by entrepreneurs, investors and civil society as well as government.

Tom Rivett-Carnac @tomcarnac:

The result @COP28_UAE is not perfect but no one who understands the nature of COPs will be surprised by that. The reference that we need to transition away from fossil fuels sets a clear direction. The pace is up to all of us. We need to choose the story we want for our future and already the transition is happening at an exponential pace. We now need to accelerate even further, because #LaterIsTooLate

350 US @350_US:

Dear @ClimateEnvoy @StateDept @POTUS: are you listening to @JoSikulu/@350Pacific?? These are the stakes. You can still take responsibility for US historical emissions & help keep #COP28 from being a death sentence for small island nations. Fast fair funded #fossilfuel phaseout!

Johan Rockström @jrockstrom:

No, COP28 will not enable us to hold the 1.5°C limit, but yes, the result is a pivotal landmark. It makes clear to finance, business and societies that we are now finally — 8 years behind Paris schedule — at the beginning of the end of the fossil-fuel-driven world economy

António Guterres @antonioguterres:

To those who opposed a clear reference to phase-out of fossil fuels during the #COP28 Climate Conference, I want to say: Whether you like it or not, fossil fuel phase-out is inevitable. Let’s hope it doesn’t come too late.

Janine Felson @jfelson:

The course correction that is needed has not yet been secured. We have made an incremental advancement over BAU when what we really needed is an exponential step-change

Carlos Díaz @PochoDiaz:

The future is #renewables! Finally #cop28 #governments put into words what scientists have been saying for decades to avoid the worst consequences of climate change. Applause to deep, rapid and sustained reductions to limit temperature rises

@andyscollick.bsky.social:

No requirements. No obligations. No penalties. No punishments for opening new oil & gas wells or coal mines. Merely a feeble trebling of renewables. Big Oil and market forces won the day and we all know it.

Elena Ciccozzi @elenaciccizzi:

Indeed, another “declaration”, with no agreement on mandatorily put an end to fossil fuel. “Transition away”: how long will this transition be?

Bob Koewing @Kobojenevich:

Climate grifters trying to be relevant when the 2 biggest polluters in the world will never get on board are a waste of space.

The World Watcher @WorldFollower0:

Sadly there are many loopholes and financial support is shocking for poorer countries.

Kalen Morton @morton_kalen:

What fuel is transporting you home?

 

The Denouement

Personally, what I found disappointing was the language about

“accelerating zero- and low-emission technologies, including, inter alia, renewables, nuclear, abatement and removal technologies such as carbon capture and utilization and storage, particularly in hard-to-abate sectors, and low-carbon hydrogen production.”

This is a call for throwing money at hoped-for technologies of proven worthlessness or actual destructiveness. At this late date, it is a horrific waste of time and resources. Direct Air Capture technology (“artificial trees”) at scale requires more renewable energy than we can produce in time to stave off disaster. Nuclear power, at a million dollars a Watt (Chernobyl, Fukushima), won’t power them either. A hydrogen economy would only make the methane problem far worse. In contrast, plants like trees and phytoplankton remove 10 tons of CO2 from the atmosphere per acre. Once turned into durable goods or biochar, hemp and kenaf crops readily outperform DAC in long-term CO2 sequestration.

Instead of pushing countries into cul de sacs, let’s get busy with strategies that actually work.

Prime Minister Modi offered India as a host site for COP-29 next year. India burns one billion tons of coal per year, 80% of which is produced domestically. If the UNFCCC agrees, we will meet there then. If not, COP-29 reverts to the default site, a lovely park in Bonn with swans swimming on a lake. In 2025, COP-30 will be in Brazil, which promises to be an even flashier trade show, and likely to be accompanied by even greater concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, more extreme weather, more coral bleaching, more species gone extinct, and a rising ocean — in other words, another tradeshow at the end of the world.

 

Thank you for reading The Great Change. This post is public so feel free to share it.

Meanwhile, let’s end these wars. I continue to solicit help to settle Ukrainian refugees into ecovillages and permaculture farms. Please donate to the Green Road by going to http://PayPal.me/greenroad2022 or by directing donations to us at greenroad@thefarm.org. There is more info on the Global Village Institute website, or you can listen to this NPR Podcast and read these recent articles in Mother Jones and The World. Thank you for your help.

To support kibbutz recovery please contribute here. To support Palestinian refugees in Gaza and the West Bank, please donate here.

Recent weather events in the UAE and Saudi Arabia should have been enough to focus the attention of delegates going to COP28 in Dubai. Will that be enough? Not even close. But we have the needed tools to fix this. We’ve had them for centuries. It is well past the time we used them. That’s why I write. That is why you support me. Thanks!

All Patreon donations and Blogger, Medium, or Substack subscriptions are needed and welcomed. You are how we make this happen. Your contributions are being made to Global Village Institute, a tax-deductible 501(c)(3) charity.

My latest book, Retropopulationism: Clawing Back a Stable Planet from Eight Billion and Change, is now available. Complimentary copies should reach Power Up! Patreon donors by Christmas.

And thanks once more to everyone for your support of the Global Village Institute. Please feel free to share this post or any part of it.

The Great Change is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.