For yet another year, the Conference of the Parties (COP) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), held in Dubai, has gone by with surprises. The Emirati presidency received a lot of criticism, although it was able to reach an agreement on the same day as the opening of the COP, something exceptional, to operationalize the loss and damage fund, established at COP27 (in Sharm el-Sheikh).
At the moment, according to data from the presidency, the commitments for its endowment reach 792 million dollars. The fund will be managed provisionally by the World Bank, but later the board of that fund will have to agree on the host country. COP 28 has concluded taking an important step: “the beginning of the end of the era of fossil fuels.”
This year, one of the most important issues on the negotiating table has been the global assessment of the collective climate action carried out in the last five years to achieve the objectives of the Paris Agreement. This balance prepares the way for the new five-year cycle, which begins with the presentation of new mitigation and adaptation commitments, as well as financing in the case of developed countries, to be incorporated into the nationally determined contributions to be presented in 2025.
The balance refers to mitigation, adaptation, means that facilitate the implementation of measures by developing countries and loss and damage, among others. It has been difficult to reach an agreement on this balance, fundamentally because the oil-producing countries, led by Saudi Arabia, as happened at the COP in Glasgow and Sharm-el-Sheikh, were opposed to incorporating the commitment to eliminate gradually the use of fossil fuels and at the same time developing countries considered that the negotiations did not take into account the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities or equity.
The draft presented by the president on Monday the 11th unleashed the “anger” of many delegates, since it made no mention of the need to eliminate or reduce this use. Was it a strategy to achieve that unprecedented agreement?
The draft presented in the early hours of the 13th, approved by the COP, emphasizes science, asking the Parties to take a series of measures to, among others:
•achieve, on a global scale, triple renewable energy capacity and double energy efficiency by 2030;
•accelerate efforts toward phasing out coal energy toward net-zero emissions energy systems, zero and low emissions technologies, including but not limited to renewables, nuclear energy, reduction and disposal technologies such as capture and carbon utilization - this last somewhat controversial technology, contemplated in the future “Law” on a net zero emissions industry of the EU -;
•accelerate and substantially reduce emissions other than carbon dioxide - such as methane -;
•moving to leave fossil fuels behind in energy systems, in a fair, orderly and equitable manner, for this purpose the content of the just transition work program created at COP 27 has also been agreed, accelerating action in this critical decade, in order to achieve the goal of net zero emissions in 2050 in accordance with science, or what is the same, abandon them - this being the point that has allowed the negotiations to be closed - and
•phase out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies.
However, the balance includes many more measures to mitigate climate change, such as those based on nature. Furthermore, under the work program on ambition in mitigation and implementation, established at COP 27, and which has been working on this year, relevant experiences for mitigation have been exchanged. and
In terms of adaptation, the global stocktake highlights the global goal of adaptation, which is to increase adaptive capacity, strengthen resilience and reduce vulnerability to climate change. The development of this objective has been possible thanks to the Glasgow–Sharm el-Sheikh work program and has culminated in the adoption by COP 28 of the framework for said objective.
Among the 2030 objectives of that framework are achieving climate-resilient food and agricultural production and food supply and distribution, reducing the impact of climate change on ecosystems and biodiversity, or protecting cultural heritage from the impacts of risks. related to climate.
Other iterative objectives have also been adopted to improve adaptation actions, including that, by 2030, all Parties have carried out updated assessments of climate hazards, the impacts of climate change and exposure to risks and vulnerabilities, which serve to formulate national adaptation plans, policy instruments and planning processes and/or strategies, and that by 2027, all Parties have established multi-hazard early warning systems and climate information services for risk reduction.
In terms of financing, the growing gap in the needs of developing countries is recognized, indicating an estimate of their financing needs of between 215,000 and 387,000 million dollars annually until 2030, and that until 2030 about 4 must be invested in clean energy. .3 trillion dollars annually, a figure that will increase thereafter to 5 trillion dollars annually until 2050, in order to achieve net zero emissions in 2050.
The role of the private sector in increasing investments is also emphasized. Next year, at COP 29, to be held in Baku (Azerbaijan), a new quantified collective financing objective that exceeds 100 billion annually allocated to developing countries for climate action will have to be adopted.
As in all COPs, it has become clear that it is difficult to bring together the positions of the 198 contracting parties of the UNFCCC since they start from very different situations and needs and the work agenda of each COP addresses a multiplicity of issues. We cannot ignore the fact that in these 28 years of work progress has been made, although not always as would have been desirable.
The US, one of the largest emitters of greenhouse gases, did not sign the Kyoto protocol, which contributed to the increase in its emissions. However, even though this COP was held in an oil-producing country, the result is positive, being another example of the need for collective and concerted action by the international community to address a global problem.
Now back home, it is time to take measures at the national level so that all these decisions made do not remain a dead letter.
