Delegates to the UN climate conference in Dubai (COP28) are entering the final leg of the negotiation amid deep differences over whether the final agreement should incorporate “the gradual elimination” of fossil fuels or only a “reduction”. ”, among other options in contention. The intervention on Saturday by the Chinese delegate at the summit, Xie Zhenhua, radiated some optimism, but the differences are profound. The closing of the summit is scheduled for tomorrow, Tuesday.
The central issue of COP28 is to determine whether, for the first time in history, the almost 200 UN countries assume an eventual end to the era of fossil fuels (coal, oil and gas), although without a specific calendar. Scientists point to fossil fuels as responsible for the gas emissions that are warming the Earth to dangerous limits.
These emissions must decrease by 43% by 2030 (compared to 2019) to be able to hope to stop warming at 1.5%, the threshold that marks a limit beyond which a worsening of climate impacts is expected.
More than 80 countries, including the US, the EU, small island states, African nations and Latin American countries, are pushing for this “phasing out”, while Saudi Arabia (backed by OPEC) has made it abundantly clear that it is not “not at all” according to these ideas. Any agreement requires the consensus of everyone.
The discussion focuses on the energy chapter of the global balance, the document that reviews compliance with the Paris Agreement, and whose conclusions must set the guidelines for the new climate action plans that countries must present from 2024)
In the known draft there are up to five proposals on this thorny issue, including the one that proposes deleting any reference to it. The central proposal advocates “accelerating efforts to progressively eliminate fossil fuels” that do not have gas mitigation technologies (that is, they lack systems to capture and store CO2 and prevent it from being released into the atmosphere).
Another option expresses the same idea but focused only on carbon. A fourth speaks diplomatically of “a phase-out of fossil fuels in an orderly and fair manner.” And others want to air this issue by asking that subsidies for these energies be eliminated.
One of the key issues in the negotiations is the battle to exclude from this “phasing out” (of fossil energy) CO2 capture and storage technologies, which absorb and fix these emissions in the subsoil (and which, therefore, , prevent them from being thrown into the atmosphere). However, these systems are not applied on a large scale, they are expensive and their capacity to trap gases is low.
The EU admits that eliminating fossil fuels “cannot be done overnight”, according to its European Commissioner for Climate Action, Wopke Hoekstra, who made it clear that carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies in English) should be reserved for the sectors most difficult to decarbonize (steel, cement…)
Crucial will be the position of China, which no longer appears as a country that blocks the agreement; and it suggests that she will accept some type of commitment but it is difficult to predict in what sense. Its special envoy to the UN climate conference in Dubai, veteran diplomat Zie Zhenhua, has not been explicit about whether China supports or opposes phasing out fossil fuels.
However, a meeting point could be around what was agreed with his American counterpart John Kerry in the meeting held in November at the Sunnylands estate, in California.
This agreement between both countries does not speak of a “phasing out” of fossil fuels, but highlights the parallel that must exist between a gradual reduction in the use of fossil fuels and the acceleration of the deployment of renewable energies.
Xie said Saturday that Xie, China and the United States agreed to “massively promote the deployment of renewable energy and will use it to gradually and orderly replace oil, gas and coal power generation, so that we can reduce greenhouse gas emissions.” greenhouse”,
The Sunnylands agreement says verbatim that both parties “intend to sufficiently accelerate the deployment of renewable energy in their respective economies through 2030 from 2020 levels to accelerate the substitution of coal, oil and gas generation.”
But not everything depends on China. The resistance to the gradual “exit” of fossil fuels does not come from a single country, but rather comes from “several fronts,” as Manuel Pulgar-Vidal, who was president of the Peruvian climate conference in the 2012.
Opposition also comes from countries that fear that “a very strict exit from fossil fuels could limit their development projections.”
Some of them allude that the transition towards renewables requires sources of financing, which they lack. Hence the importance of the financial package that emerges from this summit.
The conference has illuminated some notable commitments, such as the goal assumed by some 130 countries to triple the deployment of renewable energy and double efficiency by 2020, and the agreement of 50 companies to reduce methane emissions to zero and eliminate routine flaring in torches for 2030.
However, an analysis by the International Energy Agency (IEA) has shown, however, that full compliance with these commitments would result in global energy-related greenhouse gas emissions only falling by 30% by 2030 compared to the total necessary. to close the gap and put on track a path compatible with limiting warming to 1.5º C; Specifically, there would be a reduction of 4 gigatonnes of CO2 equivalent less than what would be expected without these commitments).