A few sincere words, spoken by a single person – the president of the UN climate conference in Dubai, Sultan al-Jabir – in the heat of a debate have served to summarize the gap that separates the positions in the negotiations of the summit, in which at least two sides are guessed. And one is represented by countries linked to oil and gas. The COP28 president stated that "there is no science" to support the need for a phase-out of fossil fuels as a requirement to limit global warming to 1.5°C.
Al-Jabir made the comments in response, and in a tongue-in-cheek tone, to questions from former Irish president Mary Robinson during a live debate on November 21, although they did not come to light until yesterday. The president of the climate summit is also the chief executive of the state-owned oil company of the United Arab Emirates, which many see as evidence of a conflict of interest.
Al-Jabir responded thus to Robinson's vehement request that, as a director of the oil company, he contribute to eliminating the fuels: "I am in no way joining any alarmist debate. There is no science or any scenario that says that the progressive elimination of fossil fuels is what will allow us to reach (the goal of) 1.5°C”, he answered.
"Show me the road map for an exit from fossil energies that is compatible with socio-economic development, without returning the world to the age of caves", he insisted. Al-Jabir maintains a speech that consists of saying, every time he takes the floor, that the reduction of fossil energy is "inevitable", but that first it is necessary to build the energy system of tomorrow without doing without fossils.
His words contradict the position of the Secretary General of the UN, António Guterres, and for some they underline "climate denial". "The science is clear: the 1.5°C limit is only possible if we finally stop burning all fossil fuels. Do not reduce, do not decrease. Gradual elimination, with a clear timetable," Guterres said on Friday.
Bill Hare, director of Climate Analytics, called Al-Jabir's words “revealing and worrying. "Sending us back to the caves is the oldest of the fossil fuel industry's metaphors: it borders on climate denial."
More than 100 countries in Africa, Europe, the Pacific and the Caribbean support a phase-out of fossil fuels; but everything indicates, given the position of the tycoon Al-Jabir, that the final agreement of the conference will have to use softer language, which comes closer to the idea of a "gradual reduction" of fossil fuels. The US supports a phase-out, and others, including Russia, Saudi Arabia and China, reject the call. Both options are on the table, as well as proposals to mention only coal or say nothing about fossil fuels. And it also needs to be determined in what way in the possible agreement the door is opened to technologies that capture and store CO2, which would legitimize the use of fossil fuels for longer.
The debate on the gradual elimination or reduction of fossil energy threatens to last the entire conference. Many may see here a byzantine question of semantics, since the two terms do not have agreed definitions. But they do group sides that symbolize more or less climate ambition.
At the weekend, the initiative of 118 governments that have pledged to triple the world's renewable energy capacity by 2030 was announced. Al-Jabir also launched his plan to reduce methane emissions from the oil sector and gas, seconded by 50 producers; but the Secretary General of the UN replied that "it is far from what is required". They clashed again.
