The 28th Conference of Parties in Dubai, COP28, concluded on 13 December with some important, and may I say, pleasantly surprising decisions.
To start with, given the world’s divisions and economic challenges, expectations were low that the climate conference would add anything significantly new. Since this year’s conference was a stocktake of the efforts made through the COP platform toward Paris goals, it had not kindled the same engagement and enthusiasm as COP27 in Egypt. Last year’s COP concluded with a historic agreement to set up a Loss and Damage Fund for poor countries, but the task of setting a realistic target for contributions from advanced economies was left to later negotiations. In a major breakthrough, this fund has been established this year with new pledges totaling $792 million. But that is not all.
COP stocktakes happen every few years, and the conclusion drawn is mostly bleak for the future of climate goals. This time, however, it promises to be different with a new climate deal, with brand new semantics of ‘transitioning away’ rather than ‘phasing out’ from fossil fuels.
After two weeks of controversy and bitter negotiations, not only did the 200 parties agree to this deal but also took at least eight other important decisions. Of these, three are directed toward establishing or strengthening dialogues, three are procedural, one sets the date for the next global stocktake (starting 2026), and another creates a new tech-implementation programme.
Technical as they may sound, they are all focused on the core objective of limiting global warming to 1.5º C and reaching net zero carbon dioxide emissions by 2050. But here’s where the discourse starts to get muddled.
Since carbon emissions continue to rise, the final COP28 agreement made stronger pitches for the parties to focus on the goal of tripling renewable energy capacity globally by 2030.
However, India has lobbied painstakingly on behalf of itself and other developing economies to not get stuck with the baseline of 2030, allowing countries the freedom to be flexible and choose a baseline that suits their economic situations.
While this may seem like a digression from climate policies, it realistically acknowledges the requirements of the non-industrialised world.
In yet another victory for India and other developing economies, the agreement has factored in objections to the term ‘phase out’ for fossil fuels, landing on the safer alternative of “phase down of unabated coal power”.
However, the most cardinal part of the entire text is the section on transitioning away from fossil fuels in energy systems in a just, orderly, and equitable manner to achieve net zero by 2050.
Also Read: 200 countries adopt ‘historic’ COP28 deal calling for transition away from fossil fuels for 1st time
A semantic solution to perennial deadlocks?
This is the first time in almost three decades that “fossil fuels” have been cited in the final agreement of climate talks. While critics have highlighted the inherent weakness of “transitioning away from fossil fuels” compared to the more robust “phasing out”, the latter remains an elusive goal in realistic terms. What this year’s climate deal has done right is that it has introduced fossil fuels into the debate by adhering to a safer expression instead of getting mired in the politically divisive expressions.
This approach also helps keep developing economies aligned with the industrialised world. The former are not prepared to phase out traditional fuels without adequate support from developed economies for transitioning to renewables and maturing their own industries.
The other reason is purely commercial and singularly pressing—the vital interest of giant fossil fuel companies and petrostates. Fossil fuels not only remain the backbone of heavy industry for most economies, they are actually being phased up as the world grapples with uncertainty and geopolitical challenges.
According to a UN report released this year, billions of dollars of new investment in expanding fossil fuel industries indicate anything but a willingness to phase down usage.
The report highlights that governments, in aggregate, plan to produce more than double the amount of coal in 2030 and double the amount of oil and gas in 2050. As scientific studies have shown, any new development of gas and oil fields is incompatible with the 1.5ºC target.
Behind the reassuring phrases of our collective green future, unresolved economic interests still lurk. The language of “transitioning away from fossil fuels” sends an essential signal to the industry, but its utility ends there. It remains conspicuously silent regarding any decision on peaking global emissions, which is a critical task for ensuring sustained reductions.
Fresh semantics notwithstanding, the new climate deal does not resolve the most fundamental inconsistencies of the climate debate but successfully calls for stronger and accelerated action. Reconciling short-term economic interests with the long-term human commitment to climate goals remains a mirage. The closer one seems to come, the further away it gets.
Amid all the haze and conflicting interests, there is an understated winner this time— the rallying support for accelerating nuclear energy. Nuclear energy is now unambiguously mentioned as a low-carbon energy source. What makes this inclusion even more noteworthy is that support for it came from merely a handful of countries in the early days of COP28, but it ended up in the final proposal as a preferred low-emission technology.
It would be interesting to see how Germany, Europe’s biggest economy, responds to this decision, as it has maintained an anti-nuclear stance even after Russia’s war in Ukraine choked natural gas supplies from Moscow. Germany’s posture seems to defy any rational explanation given its struggle to transition to renewables amid a slowing economy and bleak prospects for recovery
Also Read: India’s climate leadership test will come after COP28. Here’s how it can step up
India’s evolving climate diplomacy
Despite being the third-largest greenhouse gas emitter (albeit with low per capita emissions), India plays a crucial role in the global fight against climate change and acts as a binding force for divided camps.
India’s climate diplomacy has become more practical over time. From a rather passive stance some 15 years ago, when it hosted the COP in 2008 that didn’t make much waves, the country’s climate diplomacy has sauntered from the background to the forefront.
At COP 2021 in Glasgow, India opposed the ‘phase-out of coal’, championing the needs of the developing world. It has offered proactive initiatives like Lifestyle for Environment and the International Solar Alliance, now a fully-fledged UN-affiliated agency. It has also delivered on its Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and increased targets from previous commitments and raising the targets of previous promises.
The key takeaway from the staggering pace of global climate discourse is to keep goals realistic while at the same time enhancing incentives for industry to transition to renewables.
The world is moving to prevent carbon leakage in international business cycles. While Europe has already taken the leap with experimental Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), other G7 countries are expected to follow suit. These are slow and steady developments to attaining climate goals, and will require adjustments along the way as the developing world adapts to new realities. However, these changes must be made keeping the realities of the developing world—and that remains the sine qua non of common but differentiated responsibilities.
The writer is an Associate Fellow, Europe and Eurasia Center, at the Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses. She tweets @swasrao. Views are personal.
(Edited by Asavari Singh)