The third vice president and minister for the Ecological Transition, Teresa Ribera, believes the Dubai summit has started on the right foot, thanks to the agreement to create the fund for losses and damages aimed at repairing climate damage in vulnerable countries. “But that is not enough,” warns Ribera, who speaks to La Vanguardia in a telephone interview from Dubai. Now comes the tough negotiation of the thorniest issues.
What would be a good outcome of this conference?
We need to give signals about how we will progressively leave fossil fuels behind, about how we exit fossil fuels, what time horizons we give, and that there is no more coal. It is not only about reaching the agreement to triple renewable energies by 2030 and multiply energy efficiency by two. We need to give clear signals about how we will progressively leave fossil fuels behind.
The European Council of Ministers approved bringing to COP28 the proposal to progressively eliminate fossil fuels...
Let's see how far we go at this point. If the decisions made here are consistent, the pace of decarbonization will accelerate, and if they are weak it will make people curb their investment appetite. Therefore, I believe that the important thing is that they give clear and coherent signals about the reading that is made of these agreements.
And what is missing to give those clear signals?
There are several things we are missing: for example, how to put a price on global carbon emissions on a global scale that facilitates the reduction of greenhouse gases more quickly and promotes technological change. We must also see what these signals are like when addressing specific objectives: the expression used about the exit from fossil fuels, the time schedules that we manage and how CO2 capture technologies are oriented above all to the sectors in which they do not it is possible to decarbonize in another way. It makes no sense to dedicate economic resources to decarbonizing electricity generation [with carbon capture systems in thermal power plants, for example] when there are already ways to produce electricity that is already decarbonized [renewable]. This is going to be the hard core of the debate.
But the summit began with good news, the launch of the loss and damage fund aimed at repairing the most vulnerable nations.
I think it was very good to start with that good news in the financial package, because that allows us to reduce the concern that is always very present in these negotiations on issues about access to finance and solidarity. But it's not enough. We must address what is most problematic; We have to regain our pulse and concentrate on the guidelines that must be given to countries to update their national contributions [climate action plans for 2025] and recover the path to reducing emissions.
Is it utopian or feasible to think about a progressive elimination of fossil fuels?
The only way to win the battle against climate change is to achieve this progressive reduction until the elimination of fossil fuels. The question is knowing what signs are given that this occurs while guaranteeing the security of energy supply. Therefore, including in the agreement references to clean energy entering the energy system more quickly and that fossil fuels have to leave the energy system in a time horizon, which is not tomorrow or the day after tomorrow but rather takes longer. time, it is very important. Without a gradual elimination of fossil fuels, climate security is not possible.
Europe proposes agreeing that the maximum emissions peak will occur in 2025. Does China resist?
For now, we have not managed to get this expression to appear in the text [of the draft agreements].
I understand that in front of all this will be Russia, China and India
Well, and other oil producing countries [laughter of the minister]
And what role does Russia play in this whole debate?
Russia's situation is a breach of the rules of the international community, which is why it maintains a low profile in principle, but it is evidently a gas and oil producing and exporting country that is at war, which has broken the rules of the community. invading others.
And China, does it want to tiptoe through Dubai?
Let's see how it goes. In principle, China has been working with the United States and is reluctant to signal that it wants to increase its ambition. China was an important actor in the adaptation of the Paris Agreement, and the Dubai summit will close this cycle; and for it to be closed successfully we must give guidelines. It is not enough to sit idly by.
And Brazil has taken advantage of this conference to announce that it will be part of OPEC.
Of course, Brazil is a country of great wealth, forestry, Amazonian and biodiversity; At the same time, it is a country that is very vulnerable to climate change; and it is also an oil producing country. You have to refine and profile your identity.
We continue talking about those signals that must be given to the markets. Will cars with combustion engines stop being produced in 2035 or will the fine print be a waste?
No, I believe that the rules we have established are clear in this regard. The exceptions are very limited. What we effectively want is a generalization of the electric car and the reduction of cars with combustion engines.
The EU proposes an agreement to triple renewable energy by 2030. Is it feasible?
This is very good news, but all the instruments that allow this to become reality need to be put in place; I am referring to financial instruments, or the choice of how, where and under what conditions this renewable energy is generated. All this involves a social debate and an improvement in regulatory systems that has not yet been achieved. You have to work on it, but I do think it's a good thing. It also allows us to provide a response to many developing countries that demand safe, modern and clean energy in stable conditions and which unfortunately is not a reality today.
Should banks stop financing fossil fuels?
Yes, yes, I think so. Banks must stop that financing. The first step is to differentiate the financial cost of one operation or another, which is considered to be a higher risk activity and therefore has a higher capital cost, and ultimately, progressively reduce the financing of fossil fuels until it is eliminated. .
Is the situation ripe enough for global carbon markets?
Today there are, according to what the International Monetary Fund tells us, more than 70 carbon market and carbon pricing systems, and yet they only cover 20% of emissions. In other words, we still have a lot of work ahead of us.
We are focusing on reducing emissions especially in the field of energy: we are left with transport, waste, agriculture and tourism. Should flights that have a short-distance land alternative be eliminated in Spain?
It is very important to also encourage a change in mentality; That is to say, we all already understand that if there is an alternative that is also efficient, comfortable and affordable, it makes much more sense to opt for modes of transport that have less environmental impact and less impact on the climate.
The review of the National Integrated Energy and Climate Plan is to ensure that 81% of electricity is of renewable origin in 2030. Will these objectives be met?
I believe yes, that is our intention, which does not mean that it will be easy. Sometimes there are slightly contradictory comments. 'We need more, but we don't like this' [referring to some renewable energy installations]. The plan can be fulfilled, but obviously work must be done. But we have tried to find the maximum ambition within what we are currently capable of explaining how we can achieve it. If we were able to imagine going further, we could propose it. We think this is enormously demanding but feasible.
How are emissions behaving based on the latest data you have?
Emissions from the transport sector remain worrying. There was a very notable drop in emissions in the electricity generation sector and in the industrial sectors there was a reduction partly for efficiency reasons and partly due to the situation associated with lower demand after Covid. Now industrial activity is recovering and doing so more efficiently. But we have stagnation in emissions reductions in mobility.
Many municipalities are ignoring the legal obligation to implement low-emission urban areas, as indicated in the Climate Change law. What would I say to them?
I believe that it is enormously harmful and irresponsible that where progress has been made, there is reversal. We have many challenges ahead, they are surely complex, but it is essential to preserve what has already been done. So I asked those responsible who are in a position to work on what their predecessors did to do so, not to question the progress they have made.
How would you explain to a citizen the financial contribution that Spain makes in this international aid?
Spain is contributing the minimum share of solidarity in matters of climate change. The problem that many countries are experiencing is very big; There are many people who have enormous difficulty in overcoming and surviving today's climate impacts and yet they have contributed very little, if not at all, to the generation of the problem. Therefore, the existence of international mechanisms that allow us to respond in a supportive and rapid manner to this situation is essential.
