Dramatic, melodramatic?... Simon Stiell, Executive Secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UN Climate Change), acknowledged on Wednesday, April 10, that the title of his speech at Chatham House (London), (Two Years to Save the World), could seem too terrible and exaggerated, but he justified the phrase with a long list of evidence and projections about the serious environmental, economic and social impacts that the lack of action on climate change.
Simon Stiell presented in his conference the agenda of international meetings and decisions that must be carried out in the next two years, highlighting that it is necessary for all countries, institutions, companies and citizens not to realize the urgency of taking measures to address to climate change. Among the highlighted sections, the UN climate leader pointed out the economic effort that the richest countries must make to offset the impact of a problem that has largely been caused by their activities and greenhouse gas emissions.
Transcript (unofficial translation) of Simon Stiell's talk at Chatham House on 10 April:
"Some of you will think that the title of today's event is too dramatic. Even melodramatic.
So let me start by briefly explaining why the next two years are essential to saving our planet.
First of all, we know what is at stake. You've heard me talk about record heat and massive damage to economies, and there's no room for half-measures. Let's take all that for granted.
Second. We are at the beginning of a race that will determine who will be the biggest winners of a new clean energy economy.
And with the global living standard index constantly changing, each country's climate responses will be key to moving up or down this scale.
Whether they thrive or barely survive.
Third, many countries will only be able to implement robust new climate plans if there is a quantum leap in climate finance this year.
Fourth, it is about how the Paris Agreement works.
As of today, national climate plans - called Nationally Determined Contributions or NDCs - will barely reduce emissions between now and 2030.
We still have the opportunity to reduce greenhouse gas emissions with a new generation of national climate plans. But we need stronger plans, now.
And although each country must present a new plan, the reality is that G20 emissions represent around 80% of global emissions.
So the G20 leadership must be at the center of the solution, as it was during the great financial crisis. That was when the G20 came of age and demonstrated that major developed and developing economies can work together to avoid global economic catastrophes.
Fifth and finally, all citizens of all countries have the opportunity to be part of this transition. Every voice counts, this year and next, we will need each of those voices more than ever.
Let's consider for a moment what is at stake if we make the next two years truly count.
Bold new national climate plans will be the biggest prize for jobs and an economic springboard to propel countries up that global scale of living standards.
In the face of crop-destroying droughts, much bolder climate action to curb emissions and help farmers adapt will increase food security and reduce hunger.
Reducing fossil fuel pollution will mean improved health and huge savings for both governments and households.
The transformative potential of bold climate action – along with measures to advance gender equality – is one of the fastest ways to leave behind the inertial or “business as usual” scenario.
No SDG will be possible if the climate crisis is not controlled
To those who claim that climate change is just one of many priorities, such as ending poverty, ending hunger, ending pandemics or improving education, I say that simply none of these crucial tasks - in fact, none of the Sustainable Development Goals - will be possible unless we control the climate crisis.
In fact, continuing as before could further deepen the great inequalities between the richest and poorest countries and communities in the world, which the uncontrolled effects of climate change are aggravating.
These inequalities are kryptonite [metaphorically, something that neutralizes or diminishes the main qualities of something or someone] for cooperative global climate action, and every economy, every country and its population pays the price for it.
To begin to cure this global cancer of inequality, we need to enable bold new solutions, new national climate plans that protect people, foster jobs and drive inclusive economic growth. And we need them for the beginning of next year.
The next generation of national climate plans must be investment plans for strong, sustainable economies.
Which brings us back to the crucial importance of financing the fight against climate change.
Because it is difficult for any government to invest in renewable energy or climate resilience when the treasury coffers are empty, debt service costs have outstripped health spending, new loans are impossible to obtain, and the wolves of poverty are at the door.
This year it is essential to make a qualitative leap in financing the fight against climate change.
Every day, finance ministries, CEOs, investors and development bankers mobilize trillions of dollars. Now is the time to move those energy and infrastructure dollars of the past toward a cleaner, more resilient future. And ensure that the poorest and most vulnerable countries benefit.
This year, at COP29 in Baku, we need to agree on a new target for climate change financing that meets the needs of developing countries. But it is not enough to agree on a goal. We need a new agreement on climate change financing between developed and developing countries.
That agreement should have four key components.
First, more financing on favorable terms. Especially for the poorest and most vulnerable countries.
Second, we need new sources of international climate finance, as the G20, the International Maritime Organization and others are working on.
Thirdly – as Mia Mottley and William Ruto have made clear – we must reform development banks so that they work better for developing countries, integrate climate change into their decision-making and build a financial system fit for the 21st century.
Fourth, provide debt relief for the countries that need it most so that they have the fiscal space necessary for climate investment. Developing countries spent more than four hundred billion dollars servicing debt last year.
Experts have shown that if we do all this together, we can meet the needs of developing countries, leveraging hundreds of billions of dollars.
Increasingly closer cooperation between international institutions is more important than ever. I offer UN Climate Change collaboration wherever I can help achieve stronger and faster climate results. To the World Bank and the IMF in the upcoming spring meetings. To the G7, the G20 and their finance ministries. Together we can make this agreement a reality.
Together we must accelerate the pace. The Spring Meetings are not a dress rehearsal. Avoiding an economic catastrophe caused by climate is an essential issue. It cannot slip between the cracks of different mandates.
We cannot afford a talkfest without clear steps forward, when there is an opportunity to really make progress on every part of the new climate finance deal that all nations need.
At the Spring Meetings we need an ambitious replenishment round for the World Bank's International Development Association. This would lift hundreds of millions of people out of poverty and increase access to clean energy, especially in Africa.
Progress made in Washington, DC, in revising the World Bank's capital requirements could free up billions more for soft loans without asking for more money from donors.
Additionally, to help give countries the fiscal space they need for climate action, the IMF can help more countries address debts exacerbated by climate change and the pandemic. For example, making greater use of the Disaster Containment Relief Fund.
The World Bank's work on Climate Resilient Debt Clauses – which allow countries facing more intense storms to focus on recovery – is another welcome step in the right direction. Eligibility should now be expanded beyond small and island states to more countries and more climate impacts.
The G7 also has an absolutely crucial role, this year chaired by Italy.
The G7 governments are the main shareholders of the World Bank and the IMF. In reality, they provide both capital and management. With their voice and vote, these institutions can do much more to use all the tools at their disposal to achieve large-scale impacts on the ground.
It is in the interest of all G7 countries to take much bolder climate action within and beyond their borders, including financing the fight against climate change.
First, because serious progress in climate change financing is a prerequisite for developing countries to develop bold new national climate change plans, without which all economies, including of the G7, will soon be plunged into serious and permanent conflicts.
Secondly, because building resilience is equally urgent, to protect the supply chains on which all economies depend. We have just seen what the supply chain disruptions caused by the Covid pandemic have done to inflation, households and businesses. Well, you can bet that these shocks and inflationary effects will worsen dramatically if bolder climate action is not taken.
The world also needs the G20 to rise to this moment.
We are all aware of the geopolitical challenges. I don't downplay them. But they cannot be an excuse for shyness, in the midst of this worsening crisis.
I'll be honest: blaming each other is not strategic. Leaving aside the climate is not the solution to a crisis that will decimate all the G20 economies and that has already begun to do damage.
So the financial firepower that the G20 deployed during the global financial crisis should be redeployed and aimed squarely at curbing runaway emissions and building resilience now.
Brazil, which also hosts COP30, has a vital role to play in launching the ambitious action we need.
I am encouraged that the G20, under Brazil's leadership, is exploring ways to find new finance for climate and development. Brazil itself is also testing new ways to reduce the unreasonable costs of clean energy loans that could work for other developing countries.
Ultimately, investing in clean energy and resilient infrastructure is not enough without measures that also accelerate the decline of fossil fuels. Further progress on carbon pricing is essential to reflect the real economics of fossil fuels, including the huge health and economic costs of greenhouse gas pollution, which should not be borne by governments, households and other industries.
When I say we have two years to save the world, I wonder: who exactly has two years to save the world?
The answer is every person on this planet.
More and more people want climate action across societies and political spectrums, largely because they are feeling the effects of the climate crisis in their daily lives and household budgets. Rising costs of powered transportation from fossil fuels, from heating and cooling, from energy, rising food prices as climate disasters affect production and supply chains, to name just a few.
A recent Gallup poll of 130,000 people in 125 countries revealed that 89% of respondents want governments to take stronger action against climate change.
Yet all too often we see climate action slipping from cabinet agendas.
There is a disconnect, because in living rooms around the world, climate impacts and costs are rapidly rising on the list of household concerns.
The only sure way to get climate high on the cabinet agenda is for enough people to speak up.
So my final message today is for people around the world.
Every voice counts. Now, yours are more important than ever.
If you want bolder climate action, now is the time to make your voice count.
Thank you".
