For 40,000 participants in COP27 at Sharm El-Sheikh and others who were watching its proceedings closely, the final draft delivered on November 20 was a mixture of relief and anxiety. Relief, because a long-standing hurdle was overcome to respond to the climate catastrophe. Anxiety, because time is fast running out and there are many— and even bigger—hurdles to cross to avoid runaway global warming.
In a classic Don’t Look Up moment, nearly 8 billion people are yet to become fully aware of something scientists already know well: a devastating long-term upheaval of landscapes and societies is coming. The pandemic was just a rehearsal. Greenhouse gases, mainly carbon dioxide, have been building up in the atmosphere and changing the climate. They come from 150 years of engines burning up fossil fuels that were excavated from under the earth.
There is half as much more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere now compared to the 19th century, with the greatest acceleration in emissions after 1980. This led to a steady rise in atmospheric temperatures, and dangerous weather, most recently, in China, Nigeria and Pakistan—patterns that are now familiar everywhere.
The latest Emissions Gap report from the United Nations Environment Programme says a transformational change is needed in the next decade to have a decent chance to limit average warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. Through systems change, annual emissions from electricity generation, households, industry, transport and waste disposal must drop by over half by 2030 and down to zero thereafter. By 2050, more carbon dioxide will somehow have to be removed from the atmosphere for several more years.
Unfairness
With an extremely lopsided share of fossilfueled industrial development around the world, rising inequality amidst a recession, ongoing climatic devastation from floods, coastal erosion and drought and the accompanying patterns of disease, hunger and forced migration, the stakes in Egypt were unusually high.
Parties to the 1992 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) have met for three decades. The meetings are overwhelmingly directed by dominant voices in Europe and the US, together with a few swing players including Saudi Arabia, China and occasionally, India.
Until about seven years ago, climate negotiations were mostly diplomacy talk about reducing greenhouse gas emissions and less about finding ways to help communities adapt to a changing climate. But, emissions are still rising and the world faces more frequent and intense disasters. This is why loss and damage has become important in Sharm ElSheikh. It is a track of climate negotiations focused on finding remedies for people experiencing loss of homes, communities, ways of living and even national identities as a result of climate change.
Scientists, environmentalists and others are dismayed that there was no call at COP27 to end or draw-down all fossil fuels, a demand voiced and unsuccessfully held out by India. Such a shared statement would at least have put into motion a process for determining pathways to meet the 1.5 degree goal.
The invasion of Ukraine by Russia has suddenly made Europe gas-poor in an approaching winter. As a result, it is scrambling for LNG, mainly through deals in Africa and the US, while wagging fingers at countries like India to phase out its coal power, its only dependable resource for baseload electricity. What stands exposed is the duplicity of American and European diplomats who speak grandly of achieving 1.5 degrees without significantly reducing their own emissions or providing support to developing countries for emissions reductions and climate protection.
Loss and damage finance
For hosts at the ‘African’ COP, the big win was new language for a loss and damage finance facility with supporting institutions. Demands for protecting the vulnerable from climate impacts have a long history but were forestalled until November 19 evening by rich countries, especially the US. This is also a significant victory for civil society groups, small island states, least developed countries and people at the frontlines of climate impacts. A piggy bank has been created, but will those responsible fill it up?
After much US lobbying in drafting the language of the 2015 Paris Agreement, remedy for loss and damage cannot imply liability or legal arbitration for torts or acts of negligence. But even US media had to concede that their country has generated the most greenhouse gases into the atmosphere and has the biggest responsibility for remedy.
Scientists write, “We’re Heading in the Wrong Direction”. Will the rest of humanity pay heed and shift course fast enough? That is the question of our time.
(The writer is Professor, IIT Madras, and author: A Social Theory of Corruption: Notes from the Indian Subcontinent)
