At COP27, negotiators approve a deal to compensate poorer nations who are victims of climate change, but little progress is made in addressing the combustion of fossil fuels, the primary source of global warming.
Countries have agreed to a historic fund to aid vulnerable nations impacted by climate disasters, but have failed to intensify efforts to reduce the emissions that cause these disasters.
There are also many unpleasant decisions to be made about the hard-won compensation plan, such as who contributes and who is eligible for cash.
The inclusion of funds for so-called “loss and damage” on the formal agenda for the Sharm el-Sheikh discussions was viewed as a milestone.
Although they contributed little to the pollution that produced global warming, activists applauded the decision to assist developing nations in coping with its destructive effects, such as extreme flooding, storms, drought, and rising sea levels.
Molwyn Joseph of Antigua and Barbuda, who chairs the organization of tiny island states, characterized the accord as “a win for the entire world.
However, there have been strong criticisms that the global agreement, which was reached before daybreak after additional difficult overnight negotiations, made little headway in reducing greenhouse gases that cause loss and damage.
A vow to eliminate all fossil fuels failed due to opposition from petro-states. Numerous countries have stated that the 1.5C target’s ambiguous phrasing was far too permissive.
“1.5 degrees Celsius on life support”
Alok Sharma, the representative of the United Kingdom at the conference and the president of last year’s climate negotiations in Glasgow, stated that the 1.5C goal was “on life support.”
Mr. Sharma, highlighting shortcomings in the deal to reduce emissions, stated: “Together with several other parties, we proposed several initiatives that would have contributed to this outcome.
Not in this text is a peak in emissions before 2025, as the science tells us is necessary.
“In this passage, there is no explicit mention of the phase-out of coal.
“A specific commitment to eliminate all fossil fuels is absent from this document.
“And the energy text, in the dying minutes, waned.”
He added: “In Glasgow, I stated that a pulse of 1.5 degrees was feeble.
“Sadly, it continues to be on life support.
“And we must all examine ourselves in the mirror to determine whether we have met this challenge in its entirety during the past two weeks.”
The COP process relies on consensus, therefore all of the almost 200 countries present must agree on the pact for it to be ratified, allowing Saudi Arabia, China, and Russia to oppose the widely recognized 1.5C aim.
For fear of losing the arrangement on the loss and damage fund, it also discouraged ambitious nations from taking a tougher stance.
Not enough progress has been made.
The head of climate policy for the European Union, Frans Timmermans, stated that the agreement was not enough of a step forward and criticized the commitment of some nations to measures to prevent temperature increases.
Mr. Timmermans told the conference, “This is the make-or-break decade, but what we have in front of us is not enough of a stride forward for people and the planet.”
“It does not provide sufficient incentives for major emitters to increase and expedite their emission reductions.”
He added: “I ask you to admit, as you exit this room, that we have all failed to take sufficient measures to prevent and mitigate loss and damage.
We ought to have done far more; our citizens expect us to take the initiative.
“The world requires a quantum leap in climate ambition”
Secretary-General of the UN Antonio Guterres stated: “A fund for loss and damage is vital, but it is insufficient if the climate disaster erases a small island nation from the globe or transforms an entire African nation into a desert.
“The world’s climate ambitions require a quantum leap.”
Ani Dasgupta, president of the World Resources Institute, stated, “It is mind-boggling that countries have not had the fortitude to call for phasing out fossil fuels, the leading cause of climate change.”
Frantic negotiations
At the end of the second week, participants felt that a deal was unattainable, as Egypt, the summit’s host, waited until Friday to publish the first draught, hours before the summit was scheduled to end.
A sequence of frenzied talks ensued as countries sought to tilt the balance of the text in their favor, squabbling over single words in a document that covered topics ranging from forests to human rights to renewable energy.
Throughout the conference, Egypt was criticized for suppressing protests, poor organization, and the continued imprisonment of British-Egyptian activist Alaa Abd El Fattah and numerous other government opponents.
