tag:theconversation.com,2011:/africa/topics/climate-negotiations-15861/articlesClimate negotiations – The Conversation2023-11-29T16:56:18Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2183932023-11-29T16:56:18Z2023-11-29T16:56:18ZCOP28: four key issues that will dominate the latest UN climate summit<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/562417/original/file-20231129-21-jdv4ey.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C2043%2C1287&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The summit is being held in Expo City Dubai, UAE.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/unfccc/53361922506/">Kiara Worth / UNFCCC</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/">CC BY-NC-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The United Nations Environment Programme recently published a report with an unusually strong title for a UN body: “<a href="https://www.unep.org/resources/emissions-gap-report-2023">Emissions Gap Report 2023: Broken Record – Temperatures hit new highs, yet world fails to cut emissions (again)</a>”. Yet again, it highlights how far countries are off track from safeguarding the planet – and us. </p>
<p>As the world gathers in the United Arab Emirates for the annual UN climate change conference (or, more formally, Conference of the Parties, COP), the stakes are as high as ever. The head of the UN climate change secretariat Simon Stiell has urged for this meeting – COP28 – to be a “<a href="https://unfccc.int/news/new-analysis-of-national-climate-plans-insufficient-progress-made-cop28-must-set-stage-for-immediate">turning point</a>.”</p>
<p>Can this COP deliver on that goal? Perhaps. </p>
<p>As an academic <a href="https://profiles.cardiff.ac.uk/staff/allanj6">focused on international climate governance</a>, I’ve seen how trust is vital for an ambitious outcome. Delegates negotiate all night. They trade off issues against another. And at the end of the long summit, negotiators and ministers rely on each other to uphold bargains made over hundreds of hours of talks. But, though COP28 will be my 11th climate COP, I’ve never seen trust so low among countries. </p>
<p>Here are the key issues at stake this time round:</p>
<h2>1. Whether the host really matters</h2>
<p>Does it matter that the host country is a <a href="https://theconversation.com/cop28-inside-the-united-arab-emirates-the-oil-giant-hosting-2023-climate-change-summit-217859">major oil producer</a>, and the COP president, Sultan Al Jaber is the head of the UAE’s national oil company? Yes and no. Optics-wise, it’s not great. </p>
<p>The UAE is host because the COPs follow a regional rotation. When the Asia-Pacific region was due to select its host country, during the pandemic, only the UAE ultimately stepped forward. There are legitimate worries and already evidence of a <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-67508331">conflict of interest</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/562427/original/file-20231129-28-4p0hiv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Dubai skyline" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/562427/original/file-20231129-28-4p0hiv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/562427/original/file-20231129-28-4p0hiv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=308&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/562427/original/file-20231129-28-4p0hiv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=308&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/562427/original/file-20231129-28-4p0hiv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=308&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/562427/original/file-20231129-28-4p0hiv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=387&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/562427/original/file-20231129-28-4p0hiv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=387&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/562427/original/file-20231129-28-4p0hiv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=387&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The UAE is the world’s seventh largest oil producer.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/dubai-city-amazing-center-skyline-famous-1757555312">Rasto SK / shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Yet a COP president is a constrained actor. It can facilitate and provide support, but <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14693062.2022.2120453">cannot set the agenda</a> or nullify any views put forward. Countries are quick to jump on someone seen to be overstepping their bounds, and not facilitating a “party-driven process.” </p>
<p>Informally, the COP president can set more or less ambitious goals for the meeting and help broker better deals for the planet. Ultimately though, it is up to countries to deliver.</p>
<h2>2. A fight over the agenda</h2>
<p>COP28 president Al Jaber’s first test comes before the meeting starts. Countries must agree to the agenda – what issues they will negotiate and (maybe) decide on. This year, there are 16 suggested additions. A record in my experience, and most will surely prove provocative.</p>
<p>A coalition called the Like-Minded Group of Developing Countries (LMDC) has brought forward several suggestions. The group, which includes China, India, Saudi Arabia and Bolivia among others, has proposed negotiations on doubling adaptation finance, as agreed in Glasgow in 2021, and urgently scaling up financial support from developed countries. </p>
<p>It was only last year that developed countries <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2023/nov/16/rich-countries-hit-climate-finance-goal-two-years-late-data">finally met</a> their 2010 promise to provide US$100 billion per year by 2020. This is one reason why trust between countries is low.</p>
<p>The last <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/3_11_21_%20Joint_CPR_New%20Goal.pdf">LMDC suggestion</a> may be the most controversial. When the UN framework convention on climate change was adopted in 1992, the world was clearer: there were developed and developing countries that were easily distinguished. The LMDCs and others want to protect this split and point to the historic responsibility of wealthier western countries. In their view, rich countries should be providing more climate finance.</p>
<p>The US and other developed countries want more of a spectrum, where countries act in light of their own national circumstances and capacities. They point to the emissions of countries like China and India and call for commensurate action, even in providing finance to other countries.</p>
<p>We won’t know how all this agenda fight works out until the meeting starts. If countries do not solve it by the opening day, then there could be a lengthy delay.</p>
<h2>3. The global stocktake</h2>
<p>This is an important year for the Paris agreement, signed in 2015, as it’s the first ever <a href="https://unfccc.int/topics/global-stocktake/about-the-global-stocktake/why-the-global-stocktake-is-important-for-climate-action-this-decade#tab_home">global stocktake</a>. This is a look at how countries are doing on reducing emissions, building climate resilience, and supporting developing countries. It will likely deliver a sobering inventory of countries’ collective efforts.</p>
<p>Following a year-and-a-half long technical phase to gather inputs, the stocktake is now in the political phase where countries must decide what to say about the findings. The field is open. This exercise hasn’t happened before so there isn’t a blueprint to follow. Countries could identify priority areas for action, or set goals, such as doubling renewable energy capacity.</p>
<p>The findings and the political outcome must inform the next round of countries’ pledges to cut emissions, due in 2025. It is a key part of how the Paris agreement tries to “ratchet up” climate ambition, though how this stocktake will raise ambition is also still up for debate. They have just two weeks to negotiate and the <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/Co_Chairs_Summary_9Feb_HoD.pdf">current, bullet-point-only draft</a> shows that parties are very far apart.</p>
<h2>4. Phasing down (or out) fossil fuels</h2>
<p>It was a new idea to specifically mention coal and fossil fuel subsidies in the 2021 <a href="https://theconversation.com/five-things-you-need-to-know-about-the-glasgow-climate-pact-171799">Glasgow climate pact</a>. While reducing emissions is a key part of climate discussions, the focus is often on measures like <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/guest-post-what-gets-prioritised-and-ignored-at-un-climate-negotiations/">avoiding deforestation or trading permissions to emit carbon</a> rather than simply not emitting it in the first place. </p>
<p>In the run up to COP28, there <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/cop-28-dubai-fossil-fuels-phase-out-b2451189.html">have been calls</a> by countries to either phase out or phase down fossil fuels, or maybe to specify “unabated” fossil fuels (where unabated could mean many things). This language would be groundbreaking. But, it’s important to remember that many of its proponents are still <a href="https://www.unep.org/resources/production-gap-report-2023">actively investing in fossil fuels</a>.</p>
<p>No one COP will save the planet. But this one could help ratchet up climate action in the immediate future. With much left in the air and trust among countries low, COP28 may struggle to meet even the expectation to act as a turning point.</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="Imagine weekly climate newsletter" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><strong><em>Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?</em></strong>
<br><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/newsletters/imagine-57?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=Imagine&utm_content=DontHaveTimeTop">Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead.</a> Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/newsletters/imagine-57?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=Imagine&utm_content=DontHaveTimeBottom">Join the 20,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.</a></em></p>
<hr><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/218393/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jen Allan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>A COP regular worries about a conflicted host and a lack of trust.Jen Allan, Lecturer in Environmental Politics, Cardiff UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2141212023-11-27T13:42:21Z2023-11-27T13:42:21ZThe psychology of climate negotiations: How to move countries from national self-interest to global collective action<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/557918/original/file-20231106-19-828bo2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=272%2C5%2C2347%2C1645&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">U.S. Special Climate Envoy John Kerry, second from left, during climate negotiations in 2021.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/special-presidential-envoy-for-climate-john-kerry-news-photo/1236536228?adppopup=true">Ian Forsyth/Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Global <a href="https://climate.copernicus.eu/surface-air-temperature-september-2023">heat has seared</a> to <a href="https://www.cfr.org/article/weather-summer-2023-was-most-extreme-yet">new extremes</a> in recent months, and devastating <a href="https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/photos-extreme-weather-events-2023-climate-change/">climate disasters</a> are providing powerful reminders of the costs of climate change, as governments around the world prepare for the 2023 United Nations climate summit that starts on Nov. 30.</p>
<p>While a small <a href="https://www.iea.org/reports/net-zero-roadmap-a-global-pathway-to-keep-the-15-0c-goal-in-reach">window of hope remains</a> for meeting the goals of the 2015 Paris climate agreement, the world’s <a href="https://rhg.com/research/global-greenhouse-gas-emissions-2022/">greenhouse gas emissions</a> <a href="https://www.unep.org/resources/emissions-gap-report-2023">continue to rise</a>. </p>
<p>This year’s climate summit, COP28, needs to be transformative. What will it take to harness a spirit of international cooperation in today’s <a href="https://news.sky.com/story/cop27-tense-and-divisive-geopolitics-is-distracting-governments-from-tackling-climate-crisis-12738386">complex, divisive and volatile world</a> abounding in self-interest?</p>
<p>As a former senior U.N. official, I worked for years in multilateral consensus building among often hugely divergent parties. Here are some of the challenges and negotiating techniques I expect to see as representatives from countries around the world come together in Dubai.</p>
<h2>The challenge of national self-interest</h2>
<p>To slow climate change, the world <a href="https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/eu-wrangles-over-negotiating-stance-cop28-climate-summit-2023-10-16/">must reduce greenhouse gas emissions</a>. But <a href="https://www.climatechangenews.com/2023/05/05/nations-split-over-fossil-fuels-and-carbon-capture/">oil producers have resisted</a> phasing out fossil fuels, the largest emissions source. So have nations such as India that rely on <a href="https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/india/india-will-have-to-bear-steep-cut-in-fossil-fuel-revenues-to-limit-global-warming-to-1-5-deg-c-report/articleshow/92720981.cms?from=mdr">fossil fuels to drive economic growth and development</a>. Wars in Ukraine and the Middle East have further sparked fears about energy security around the world.</p>
<p>Climate change is characteristically more <a href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1307/6/50/502002">uncertain</a>, global and <a href="https://www.cfr.org/councilofcouncils/global-memos/how-war-ukraine-and-big-power-tensions-could-derail-bali-g20-summit">longer term than other development issues</a>. In <a href="https://www.cfr.org/councilofcouncils/global-memos/how-war-ukraine-and-big-power-tensions-could-derail-bali-g20-summit">today’s complex global environment</a>, that leads to short-term <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316848555">self-interests</a> often prevailing over the longer-term collective action <a href="https://www.cfr.org/councilofcouncils/global-memos/how-war-ukraine-and-big-power-tensions-could-derail-bali-g20-summit">required to slow climate change</a>. That’s particularly true when countries also face energy insecurity, disrupted global supply chains, food shortages and increasing <a href="https://www.spglobal.com/en/enterprise/geopolitical-risk/">geopolitical instability</a>.</p>
<p>Increasing economic interdependence among countries has also increased the complexity of international relations. So has the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912913510609">growing international clout of middle-income and emerging nations</a>, among them India, Brazil, Indonesia and Nigeria, which adds to a divergent mix of influential voices in a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2346.2012.01084.x">changing political landscape</a>. </p>
<h2>The thorniest issue: Reducing emissions</h2>
<p>At COP28, the <a href="https://unfccc.int/documents/631600">first “global stocktake”</a> of countries’ efforts to deal with climate change will show that progress has been made on climate mitigation and adaptation, but it will also show that the progress so far <a href="https://theconversation.com/uns-global-stocktake-on-climate-offers-a-sobering-emissions-reckoning-but-there-are-also-signs-of-progress-217093">isn’t nearly enough</a>.</p>
<p>The obstacle to reaching agreement is not about climate science but rather the potential to <a href="https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/paris-global-climate-change-agreements">compromise countries’ positions</a> or expose them to unexpected repercussions.</p>
<p>For example, does agreeing to “phase out” fossil fuels expose those who would continue to produce or use fossil fuels – nearly all countries – to economic disadvantage, competition and new forms of political leverage involving resources during a complex energy transition? Is there a possibility that technological advances will allow for greater future flexibility on a phase-out?</p>
<p><iframe id="WDR9t" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/WDR9t/5/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>Reaching a global agreement is a marriage of many partners, with largely good intent but fear of commitment. The foundation of solutions lies in <a href="http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep17706">understanding national drivers</a>, origins of self-interests and consequent constraints and, hence, not boxing anyone in.</p>
<h2>5 tactics for negotiating a fossil fuel phase-out</h2>
<p>There are a multitude of ways to <a href="https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjeal/vol6/iss1/2/">achieve this during negotiations</a>.</p>
<p>Constructive ambiguity, which allows for agreement based on more than one interpretation, is one way. Finding a path is often more important than spelling out, or agreeing upon, a single reasoning. </p>
<p>The “<a href="https://www.eui.eu/events?id=564389">common but differentiated responsibilities</a>” inherent in climate commitments is an example. Subtle turns of phrase in an agreement – such as whether leading a global drive to cut emissions is seen as a developed-country responsibility or something simply within their greater capacity to do – can allow multiple parties to move toward the same goal by reading their own self-interest into the language used. </p>
<p>Common ground can also often be <a href="http://www.jstor.org/stable/24757411">reached incrementally</a> by building trust, confidence, comfort and eventually clarity over time.</p>
<p>For example, at the G20 meeting of major economies in September 2023 in India, the participants agreed to <a href="https://www.irena.org/News/pressreleases/2023/Sep/G20-Leaders-Endorse-IRENA-Recommendations-for-Global-Renewable-Energy-Adoption">triple their renewable energy capacity</a>. They stopped short of agreeing to “phase out” fossil fuel use, but their agreement set the stage for future progress by a <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/g20-summit-climate/analysis-g20-fails-on-fossil-fuel-phase-out-as-dark-cloud-looms-idINL8N3AN1GG">powerful group</a> that operates 93% of the globe’s coal power plants and is responsible for 80% of global emissions.</p>
<p>Linguistic gymnastics may be deployed at COP28 to translate the G20 agreement into a global agreement aimed toward “phasing out” fossil fuels. </p>
<p>Using phrases such as phasing out “unabated fossil fuels” or “emissions” has been <a href="https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/climate-energy/after-un-meeting-countries-brace-cop28-fossil-fuel-fight-2023-09-25/">floated as compromises</a>. Each, however, allows the caveat that carbon capture technology could be used to cancel out emissions, meaning fossil fuel use could continue. Whether that technology can effectively be applied on a large scale is hotly debated.</p>
<p>Climate negotiations can also be used to pressure governments to act. There is huge international <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-07-13/cop28-s-al-jaber-gets-pushed-harder-for-ambitious-climate-deal">pressure on the president of COP28</a>, Sultan Ahmed al-Jaber, who is also the CEO of the United Arab Emirates’ state-owned oil company, to exercise his <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/1f37f3c8-862b-4bb3-86b4-9c06202c33bd">influence with other oil producers and businesses</a> to edge closer to agreement on “phasing out” emissions. </p>
<p><iframe id="9XC4a" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/9XC4a/1/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>Finally, should the words “phase out” still elude negotiators, it will be important to ensure a trajectory of progress. When words in an agreement won’t (yet) work, officials can send those difficult issues to other forums to work out the details.</p>
<p>For example, the question of phasing out fossil fuels can be incorporated into the ongoing <a href="https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/mckinsey-explainers/what-is-the-global-stocktake">global stocktake discussion</a> and the <a href="https://unfccc.int/topics/mitigation/workstreams/mitigation-work-programme#Activities-2023">mitigation work program</a>, where participants are exploring new pathways to bridge the <a href="https://www.wri.org/news/statement-uns-global-stocktake-report-offers-damning-report-card-global-climate-effort">gaps in progress</a>.</p>
<p>These tactics illustrate a key dynamic balance between comfort and pressure when striving to find agreement within the U.N. climate talks, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-023-09593-y">where decisions are made by consensus</a>. A common thread is maintaining flexibility – whether operational or interpretative – so all nations can move forward. </p>
<h2>Toward a new paradigm for collective action</h2>
<p>True <a href="https://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/ethics-and-global-climate-change-84226631">collective action on climate change</a> requires those who govern, represent or influence to respond to universal values, including ensuring a healthy planet for all nations and future generations.</p>
<p>It requires separating climate risks and responses from economic, political and other immediate concerns, and appreciating that critical systems that keep the planet healthy are <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGI_Chapter04.pdf">close to breaking points</a>. </p>
<p>Getting all stakeholders to value the future may take incremental improvement, but there is progress. For example, soft diplomatic channels <a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/us-climate-envoy-kerry-arrives-talks-with-chinese-counterpart-2023-07-17/">between the U.S. and China</a> – currently the world’s top two emitters – have been able to separate climate change from the far more contentious issues of trade, economic rivalry and shifting geopolitics.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Xie and Kerry speak to one another during COP26." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/557923/original/file-20231107-252894-5mmhhn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/557923/original/file-20231107-252894-5mmhhn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/557923/original/file-20231107-252894-5mmhhn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/557923/original/file-20231107-252894-5mmhhn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/557923/original/file-20231107-252894-5mmhhn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/557923/original/file-20231107-252894-5mmhhn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/557923/original/file-20231107-252894-5mmhhn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Special Climate Envoys Xie Zhenhua of China and John Kerry of the U.S. have met more than 50 times since they were appointed.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/special-climate-envoy-john-kerry-speaks-with-chinas-special-news-photo/1236538694?adppopup=true">Ben Stansall/AFPv ia Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>To build collective action, the Paris Declaration also sought to capitalize on the potential of well-informed nonstate actors, such as issue advocates, business leaders and city mayors, to work across borders, emphasize ethics as they influence leadership, and fill gaps that governments and institutions remain ill-equipped to resolve.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.cop28.com/en/letter-to-parties">UAE has promised</a> to create the <a href="https://sdg.iisd.org/events/2023-un-climate-change-conference-unfccc-cop-28/">most inclusive U.N. climate conference yet</a>. It’s up to the COP28 leadership to harness this potential and translate it into a decisive global shift to address climate change.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/214121/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Asif Husain-Naviatti was a career employee of the United Nations for over 25 years.</span></em></p>Negotiating global progress on climate change involves walking a fine line, as a former UN official explains.Asif Husain-Naviatti, Visiting Fellow in International Climate Governance, Columbia UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1920702022-11-02T12:28:58Z2022-11-02T12:28:58ZLoss and damage: Who is responsible when climate change harms the world’s poorest countries?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/492622/original/file-20221031-13-eywc63.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=17%2C17%2C3976%2C2646&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Extreme flooding in Pakistan in 2022 affected 33 million people.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/residents-use-a-raft-to-move-along-a-waterlogged-street-in-news-photo/1242590163"> Akram Shahid/AFP via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>You may be hearing the phrase “loss and damage” in the coming weeks as government leaders meet in Egypt for the 2022 U.N. Climate Change Conference.</p>
<p>It refers to the costs, both economic and physical, that developing countries are facing from climate change impacts. Many of the world’s most climate-vulnerable countries have done little to cause climate change, yet they are experiencing extreme heat waves, floods and other climate-related disasters. They want wealthier nations – <a href="https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions">historically the biggest sources</a> of greenhouse gas emissions – to pay for the harm. </p>
<p>A powerful example is Pakistan, where <a href="https://theconversation.com/2022s-supercharged-summer-of-climate-extremes-how-global-warming-and-la-nina-fueled-disasters-on-top-of-disasters-190546">extreme rainfall</a> on the heels of a <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-02813-6">glacier-melting heat wave</a> flooded nearly one-third of the country in the summer of 2022.</p>
<p>The flooding turned Pakistan’s farm fields into miles-wide lakes that stranded communities for weeks. <a href="https://reliefweb.int/report/pakistan/pakistan-monsoon-floods-2022-islamic-relief-pakistan-12-october-2022">More than 1,700 people died</a>, millions lost their homes and livelihoods, and more than 4 million acres of crops and orchards, as well as livestock, drowned or were damaged. This was followed by a <a href="https://www.who.int/emergencies/disease-outbreak-news/item/2022-DON413">surge in malaria</a> cases as mosquitoes bred in the stagnant water.</p>
<p>Pakistan contributes only about 1% of the global greenhouse gas emissions driving climate change. But greenhouse gases don’t stay within national borders – emissions anywhere affect the global climate. A warming climate intensifies rainfall, and studies suggest climate change may have <a href="https://www.worldweatherattribution.org/climate-change-likely-increased-extreme-monsoon-rainfall-flooding-highly-vulnerable-communities-in-pakistan/">increased Pakistan’s rainfall intensity by as much as 50%</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/492878/original/file-20221101-26784-xmat9f.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A man sits on a bench outside the door too his home, surrounded by floodwater up to his shins." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/492878/original/file-20221101-26784-xmat9f.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/492878/original/file-20221101-26784-xmat9f.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/492878/original/file-20221101-26784-xmat9f.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/492878/original/file-20221101-26784-xmat9f.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/492878/original/file-20221101-26784-xmat9f.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/492878/original/file-20221101-26784-xmat9f.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/492878/original/file-20221101-26784-xmat9f.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Many of the millions of people affected by the 2022 flooding in Pakistan already lived in poverty.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/abdul-rahim-is-photographed-outside-his-flooded-house-on-news-photo/587483798">Gideon Mendel For Action Aid/ In Pictures/Corbis via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The question of payments for loss and damage has been a <a href="https://climateanalytics.org/briefings/loss-and-damage/">long-standing point of negotiation</a> at United Nations climate conferences, held nearly every year <a href="https://unfccc.int/process/the-convention/history-of-the-convention#Climate-Change-in-context">since 1995</a>, but there has been little progress toward including a financial mechanism for loss and damage in international climate agreements.</p>
<p>Many <a href="https://unclimatesummit.org/time-to-respond/">developing countries</a> are looking to this year’s conference, COP27, as a crucial moment for making progress on <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop27-why-is-addressing-loss-and-damage-crucial-for-climate-justice/">establishing that formal mechanism</a>.</p>
<h2>Africa’s climate conference</h2>
<p>With Egypt hosting this year’s U.N. climate conference, it’s not surprising that loss and damage will take center stage.</p>
<p>Countries in Africa have some of the <a href="https://ourworldindata.org/contributed-most-global-co2">lowest national greenhouse gas emissions</a>, and yet the continent is home to many of the world’s most <a href="https://gain.nd.edu/our-work/country-index/">climate-vulnerable countries</a>.</p>
<p><iframe id="vcea5" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/vcea5/1/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>To deal with climate change, these countries – many of them <a href="https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/gross-domestic-product">among the world’s poorest</a> – will have to invest in adaptation measures, such as seawalls, <a href="https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/climate-smart-agriculture">climate-smart agriculture</a> and infrastructure that’s more resilient to high heat and extreme storms. The UN Environment Program’s Adaptation Gap Report, released Nov. 3, 2022, found that developing countries need <a href="https://www.unep.org/resources/adaptation-gap-report-2022">five to 10 times more</a> international adaptation finance than wealthier countries are providing.</p>
<p>When climate disasters strike, countries also need more financial help to cover relief efforts, infrastructure repairs and recovery. This is loss and damage.</p>
<p>Egypt is emphasizing the need for wealthy countries to <a href="https://cop27.eg/#/">make more progress on providing financial support for both</a> adaptation and loss and damage. </p>
<p><iframe id="i6gk1" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/i6gk1/1/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<h2>Climate injustice and loss and damage</h2>
<p>The conversation on loss and damage is inherently about equity. It evokes the question: Why should countries that have done little to cause global warming be responsible for the damage resulting from the emissions of wealthy countries?</p>
<p>That also makes it contentious. Negotiators know that the idea of payments for loss and damage has the potential to lead to further discussions about financial compensation for historical injustices, such as slavery in the United States or colonial exploitation by European powers.</p>
<p>At COP26, held in 2021 in Glasgow, Scotland, negotiators made progress on some key issues, such as <a href="https://www.wri.org/insights/cop26-climate-pledges-tracking-progress">stronger emissions targets and pledges to double adaptation finance</a> for developing countries. But COP26 was seen as a disappointment by advocates trying to establish a financial mechanism for wealthier nations to provide finance for loss and damage in developing countries.</p>
<p><iframe id="VMKQq" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/VMKQq/8/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<h2>What a formal mechanism might look like</h2>
<p>The lack of resolution at COP26, combined with Egypt’s commitment to focus on financing for adaptation and loss and damage, means the issue will be on the table this year.</p>
<p>The nonprofit <a href="https://www.c2es.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Loss-and-Damage-Issues-and-Options-for-cop27.pdf">Center for Climate and Energy Solutions</a> expects discussions to focus on institutional arrangements for the <a href="https://www.iied.org/interview-how-can-santiago-network-for-loss-damage-meet-technical-needs-communities-vulnerable">Santiago Network for Loss and Damage</a>, which focuses on providing technical assistance to help developing countries minimize loss and damage; and on fine-tuning the <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/Glasgow_Dialogue.pdf">Glasgow Dialogue</a>, a formal process developed in 2021 to bring countries together to discuss funding for loss and damage.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.v-20.org/">V20 group</a> of finance ministers, representing 58 countries highly vulnerable to climate change, and <a href="https://www.g7germany.de/g7-en/g7-summit/g7-members">the G-7</a> group of wealthy nations also <a href="https://www.v-20.org/our-voice/news/press-releases/v20-and-g7-agree-on-financial-protection-cooperation-to-formally-launch-global-shield-against-climate-risks-at-cop27">reached an agreement</a> in October 2022 on a financial mechanism called the <a href="https://www.bmz.de/en/issues/climate-change-and-development/global-shield-against-climate-risks">Global Shield Against Climate Risks</a>. The Global Shield is focused on providing risk insurance and rapid financial assistance to countries after disasters, but it’s unclear how it will fit into the international discussions. Some groups <a href="https://www.climatechangenews.com/2022/07/18/germany-promotes-insurance-based-global-shield-for-climate-victims/">have raised concerns</a> that relying on insurance systems can overlook the poorest people and distract from the larger discussion of establishing a dedicated fund for loss and damage. </p>
<p>Two elements of developed countries’ reluctance to formalize a loss and damage mechanism involve how to determine which countries or communities are eligible for compensation and what the <a href="https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/211025c-davis-shawoo-loss-and-damage-finance-pr-2110l.pdf">limitations</a> of such a mechanism would be.</p>
<p>What would a threshold for loss and damage eligibility look like? Limiting countries or communities from receiving compensation for loss and damage based on their current emissions or gross domestic product could become a problematic and complicated process. Most experts recommend <a href="https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/211025c-davis-shawoo-loss-and-damage-finance-pr-2110l.pdf">determining eligibility based on climate vulnerability</a>, but this can also prove difficult.</p>
<h2>How will world leaders respond?</h2>
<p>Over a decade ago, developed countries committed to provide <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02846-3">US$100 billion per year</a> to fund adaptation and mitigation in developing countries. But they have been <a href="https://www.unep.org/resources/adaptation-gap-report-2022">slow to meet</a> that commitment, and it does not cover the damages from the climate impacts the world is already seeing today. </p>
<p>Establishing a loss and damage mechanism is considered one avenue to provide recourse for global climate injustice. All eyes will be on Egypt Nov. 6-18, 2022, to see how world leaders respond.</p>
<p><em>This article was updated Nov. 3, 2022, with the UNEP Adaptation Gap Report findings.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/192070/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Bethany Tietjen does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>That’s the big question at the upcoming UN Climate Change Conference, known as COP27, and it’s controversial.Bethany Tietjen, Research fellow in climate policy, The Fletcher School, Tufts UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1721702021-11-19T13:51:25Z2021-11-19T13:51:25ZThe art and chaos of negotiating the Glasgow Climate Pact – Climate Fight podcast part 5<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/432641/original/file-20211118-26-s08jkp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=84%2C90%2C3905%2C2571&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Huddling: John Kerry, US climate negotiator is surrounding at the COP26 Glasgow summit. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Tiffany Cassidy</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>A good negotiation is supposed to leave everyone feeling a little unsatisfied. The US presidential envoy on climate, John Kerry, said as much when the latest UN climate change conference – COP26 in Glasgow – drew to a close. The Glasgow Climate Pact it produced will have disappointed most countries for one reason or another. But the delegates who arrived in Glasgow hoping for a new financial settlement between rich and poor countries, to help the latter weather the climate crisis, will feel most let down of all.</p>
<p>This is part five and the final episode of <em>Climate fight: the world’s biggest negotiations</em>, a series on COP26 from <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/the-anthill-podcast-27460">The Anthill podcast</a>. In this episode we reported from Glasgow where we spoke with academics who have been researching the UN climate negotiations for decades, and some of the people representing their countries in the talks. </p>
<iframe src="https://embed.acast.com/5e3bf1111a6e452f6380a7bc/6197a1792af08e0013653e0c" frameborder="0" width="100%" height="190px"></iframe>
<p><iframe id="tc-infographic-564" class="tc-infographic" height="100" src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/infographics/564/df7570dc1ec7680034215f0ca19d2e0378e13f3b/site/index.html" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>As we heard <a href="https://theconversation.com/cop26-billions-are-being-spent-tackling-climate-change-where-is-it-all-going-climate-fight-podcast-part-1-169120">in the first episode</a>, developed countries promised to pay the developing world US$100 billion (£75 billion) a year by 2020, but fell short by about US$20 billion. Climate finance is supposed to help some of the world’s poorest people survive a crisis they didn’t create and develop economies which are green and resilient.</p>
<p>But there’s something else developing countries argue affluent countries owe them for: loss and damage. Lisa Vanhala, professor of political science at UCL, explains that this refers to the irreversible impacts of climate change which countries cannot adapt to, like sea level rise. Compensation for loss and damage was “really the big thing that developing countries came into [COP26] united in asking for,” Vanhala says. But the result was “no cash on the table”, as the EU and US blocked the creation of a facility for delivering loss and damage finance.</p>
<p>The fortnight in Glasgow passed with a flurry of pre-arranged deals and speeches by world leaders. In the negotiating rooms, delegates from 197 countries gathered to grind out an agreement, often haggling over lines in the draft text long into the night. COP26 was labelled <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/sep/09/scottish-campaigners-condemn-cop26-as-the-most-exclusionary-ever-accommodation">the least accessible</a> UN climate change summit yet, as COVID-19 vaccine hoarding and price gouging for accommodation in Glasgow limited attendance by poorer nations, and rules set by the UK presidency kept civil society groups at bay.</p>
<p>In the first days of the summit, long lines kept delegates and observers waiting outside in the rain for hours. So how did all of this affect the eventual agreement?</p>
<p>“I think a mistake that is commonly made is to assume that all these negotiation outcomes are rational,” says François Gemenne, director of the Hugo Observatory at the University of Liège in Belgium. Gemenne has studied the UN climate negotiation process for a long time, and saw how administrative blunders helped derail an agreement at COP15 in Copenhagen in 2009. </p>
<p>While he says the UK’s handling of the talks and the position of other rich countries on loss and damage will have sowed resentment among developing nations which came to hammer out a deal, “COP is not a one-shot event. It’s a continuous process … and it’s important for countries of the global outh [especially] to keep the process rolling.”</p>
<p>Abhinay Muthoo, a professor of economics and expert in negotiating at the University of Warwick, says “trust is very important… in enriching deals.” The Glasgow Climate Pact reaffirmed the desire of all countries to limit global warming to 1.5°C. But the discord of COP26, which included a last-minute intervention by India and China to water down a resolution on coal power, showed how much work is still needed to bridge the divide between developed and developing countries.</p>
<p>In this episode, we also speak to Hadeel Hisham Ikhmais, a climate negotiator from Palestine, who explains what it’s like to be a negotiator behind closed doors at COP26. </p>
<p>The Climate Fight podcast series is produced by Tiffany Cassidy. Sound design by Eloise Stevens and the theme tune is by Neeta Sarl. The series editor is Gemma Ware. </p>
<p>A transcript of this episode will be available soon. </p>
<p>You can find us on Twitter <a href="https://twitter.com/TC_Audio">@TC_Audio</a>, on Instagram at <a href="https://www.instagram.com/theconversationdotcom/?hl=en">theconversationdotcom</a> or <a href="mailto:podcast@theconversation.com">via email</a>. You can also sign up to <a href="https://theconversation.com/newsletter?utm_campaign=PodcastTCWeekly&utm_content=newsletter&utm_source=podcast">The Conversation’s free daily email here</a>. You can listen to The Anthill podcast via any of the apps listed above, download it directly via <a href="https://feeds.acast.com/public/shows/5e3bf1111a6e452f6380a7bc">our RSS feed</a>, or find out how else to <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-to-listen-to-the-conversations-podcasts-154131">listen here</a>.</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="UK Research and Innovation (UKRI)" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/423510/original/file-20210928-22-3fcpqf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/423510/original/file-20210928-22-3fcpqf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=300&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/423510/original/file-20210928-22-3fcpqf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=300&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/423510/original/file-20210928-22-3fcpqf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=300&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/423510/original/file-20210928-22-3fcpqf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=377&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/423510/original/file-20210928-22-3fcpqf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=377&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/423510/original/file-20210928-22-3fcpqf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=377&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><em>Climate Fight: the world’s biggest negotiation is a podcast series supported by <a href="https://www.ukri.org/">UK Research and Innovation</a>, the UK’s largest public funder of research and innovation.</em> </p>
<hr><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/172170/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The Conversation has received support from UK Research and Innovation to make the Climate Fight podcast series. Abhinay Muthoo has received funding in the past from the Economic and Social Research Council. François Gemenne has received funding from the National Fund for Scientific Research (FNRS), the European Commission, the French National Research Agency (ANR) , the Belmont Forum, the AXA Research Fund. He is also a lead author for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Lisa Vanhala has received funding from the European Research Council, the Economic and Social Research Council and the British Academy. She has consulted for the Baring Foundation, the Lankelly Chase Foundation, the Legal Education Foundation and the Local Trust. She has also consulted for the Public Law Project, Access Social Care, Impact Social Justice, the Central England Law Centre, Practical Action, Greenpeace International, Independent Age and the Equality and Human Rights Commission. She sits on the Sustainable Future grant-making committee of the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust.</span></em></p>Listen to the fifth and final episode of a series from The Anthill Podcast, reporting from what happened at the COP26 climate change summit in Glasgow.Jack Marley, Environment + Energy Editor and Host of the Climate Fight podcast series, The ConversationLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1709792021-11-02T15:36:50Z2021-11-02T15:36:50Z6 priorities could deliver energy breakthroughs at the Glasgow climate summit – there’s progress on some already<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/429678/original/file-20211102-19-a871qm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C18%2C6240%2C4072&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The energy transition is already underway.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/electricity-pylons-and-wind-turbines-stand-beside-the-rwe-news-photo/510814700">Volker Hartmann/Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Much of the news coming out of the U.N. climate conference has focused on the spectacle, and how countries’ pledges <a href="https://www.climate-transparency.org/g20-climate-performance/g20report2021">aren’t on track</a> to prevent dangerous climate change. But behind the scenes, there is reason for hope.</p>
<p>In many countries, the energy transition is already underway as falling costs make renewable energy ubiquitous and <a href="https://www.irena.org/newsroom/pressreleases/2021/Jun/Majority-of-New-Renewables-Undercut-Cheapest-Fossil-Fuel-on-Cost">more affordable than fossil fuels</a>. A growing number of world leaders agreed at the climate summit to <a href="https://theconversation.com/biden-announces-a-sweeping-methane-plan-heres-why-cutting-the-greenhouse-gas-is-crucial-for-protecting-climate-and-health-168220">reduce methane emissions</a> and aim for net-zero emissions. Over 40 countries <a href="https://ukcop26.org/global-coal-to-clean-power-transition-statement/">committed to phase out unabated coal power</a> in the next two decades.</p>
<p>The challenge for government officials now is figuring out how to help scale up clean energy dramatically while reducing fossil fuel emissions, and still meeting the <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-banning-financing-for-fossil-fuel-projects-in-africa-isnt-a-climate-solution-169220">rapidly growing energy demands</a> of billions of people in developing and emerging economies. With an <a href="https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/market-insights/latest-news/natural-gas/110121-europes-energy-crisis-deepens-as-russia-slashes-gas-exports">ongoing energy crisis</a> creating shortages and record high prices in several countries, navigating this early stage of the energy transition requires thoughtful policies and well-prioritized plans. </p>
<p>As <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=DAwwVkwAAAAJ&hl=en">climate</a> <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=sfI-c0YAAAAJ&hl=en">policy experts</a> with decades of experience in international energy policy, we identified six strategic priorities that could help countries navigate this tricky terrain.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Illustration showing where to cut emissions soonest most efficiently" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/421580/original/file-20210916-21-15niz3l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/421580/original/file-20210916-21-15niz3l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/421580/original/file-20210916-21-15niz3l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/421580/original/file-20210916-21-15niz3l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/421580/original/file-20210916-21-15niz3l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=632&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/421580/original/file-20210916-21-15niz3l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=632&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/421580/original/file-20210916-21-15niz3l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=632&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Meeting the Paris climate agreement goal of keeping global warming under 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 F) will require reducing fossil fuels and increasing renewable energy and energy efficiency, as well as keeping carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere with techniques such as carbon capture and storage or use (CCS and CCU).</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">International Renewable Energy Agency</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>1) Deploy carbon pricing and markets more widely</h2>
<p>Only a few <a href="https://carbonpricingdashboard.worldbank.org/">countries, states and regions currently have a carbon price</a> that is high enough to push polluters to cut their emissions. </p>
<p>A price on carbon, often created through a tax or carbon market system, captures the cost of harms caused by greenhouse gas emissions that companies don’t currently pay for, such as climate change, damage to crops and rising health care costs. It is particularly critical for power production and energy-intensive industries. </p>
<p>One goal of the Glasgow negotiations is to write rules to help carbon markets function well and transparently. That’s essential for effectively meeting the many net-zero climate goals that have been announced by countries from <a href="https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/net-zero-pledges-grow">Japan and South Korea to the U.S., China and those in the European Union</a>. It includes rules on the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/sep/16/carbon-offset-projects-carbon-emissions">use of carbon offsets</a>, which allow individuals or companies to invest in projects elsewhere to offset their own emissions. Carbon offsets are currently <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-corporate-climate-pledges-of-net-zero-emissions-should-trigger-a-healthy-dose-of-skepticism-156386">highly contentious</a> and not delivering trustworthy emissions credits.</p>
<h2>2) Focus attention on the hard-to-decarbonize sectors</h2>
<p>Shipping, road freight and industries like aluminum, cement and steel are all <a href="https://www.irena.org/publications/2020/Sep/Reaching-Zero-with-Renewables">difficult places for cutting emissions</a>, in part because they don’t yet have tested, affordable replacements for fossil fuels. While there are some <a href="https://theconversation.com/bendable-concrete-and-other-co2-infused-cement-mixes-could-dramatically-cut-global-emissions-152544">innovative ideas</a>, competitiveness concerns – such as companies moving production out of the country to avoid regulations – have been a key barrier to progress.</p>
<p>Europe is trying to overcome this barrier by establishing a <a href="https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/12228-EU-Green-Deal-carbon-border-adjustment-mechanism-_en">carbon border adjustment mechanism</a>, which would tax imports of goods that didn’t face the same level of carbon taxes at home.</p>
<p>The United States and the European Union also announced at the summit that they would work to negotiate a global agreement to <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/10/31/joint-us-eu-statement-on-trade-in-steel-and-aluminum/">reduce the high emissions in steel production</a>.</p>
<h2>3) Get China and other emerging economies on board</h2>
<p>It is clear that coal, the most carbon-intensive fossil fuel, needs to be phased out fast, and doing so is critical to both the U.N.’s energy and climate agendas. Given that more than <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-climate-change-china-coal/china-generated-over-half-worlds-coal-fired-power-in-2020-study-idUSKBN2BK0PZ">half of global coal</a> is consumed in China, its actions stand out, although other emerging economies such as India, Indonesia and Vietnam are also critical.</p>
<p>This will not be easy. <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/mapped-worlds-coal-power-plants">Notably half of the Chinese coal plants are less than a decade old</a>, a fraction of a coal plant’s typical life span. China has raised its climate commitments, including pledging to reach net-zero emissions by 2060 and agreeing to <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02645-w">end financing of coal power plants in other countries</a>, but its <a href="https://www4.unfccc.int/sites/NDCStaging/Pages/Party.aspx?party=CHN&prototype=1">current pathway</a> will not yield substantial reductions this decade.</p>
<p>A major announcement by <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/01/india-targets-2070-for-net-zero-emissions-china-makes-no-new-commitments.html">India’s prime minister at the COP around a net-zero goal</a> for his country by 2070, with interim targets for ratcheting down emissions before then, is an early win. </p>
<p>Indonesia and Vietnam signed on to the <a href="https://ukcop26.org/global-coal-to-clean-power-transition-statement/">pledge to phase out unabated coal power</a>, but Indonesia included some caveats. It said it would “consider accelerating coal phase-out into the 2040s,” but made that conditional on receiving more international financial and technical assistance.</p>
<h2>4) Focus on innovation</h2>
<p>Support for innovation has brought cutting-edge renewable power and electric vehicles much faster than anticipated. More is possible. For example, <a href="https://www.g20.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Annexes-G20-Joint-Energy-and-Climate-2021.pdf">offshore wind</a>, geothermal, carbon capture and <a href="https://theconversation.com/hydrogen-is-one-future-fuel-oil-execs-and-environmentalists-could-both-support-as-rival-countries-search-for-climate-solutions-159201">green hydrogen</a> are new developments that can make a big difference in years to come.</p>
<p>At the climate conference, a coalition of world leaders launched what they call the “Breakthrough Agenda” – a framework for bringing governments and businesses together to collaborate on clean energy and technology. The <a href="https://racetozero.unfccc.int/system/glasgow-breakthroughs/">Glasgow Breakthroughs</a> include making electric vehicles the affordable norm, <a href="https://www.irena.org/events/2021/Oct/IRENA-to-Mobilise-Energy-Transition-Action-at-COP26">bringing down clean energy costs</a>, scaling up hydrogen energy storage and getting steel production to near-zero emissions, all by 2030.</p>
<p>The countries and companies that lead in developing these new technologies will reap economic benefits, including jobs and economic growth. More opportunities exist in <a href="https://www.irena.org/events/2020/Aug/Thirty-Innovations-for-a-Renewable-Powered-Future">market design, social acceptance, equity, regulatory frameworks and business models</a>. Energy systems are deeply interconnected to social issues, so changing them will be successful only if the solutions look beyond the technology to societal needs.</p>
<h2>5) Prioritize green financing</h2>
<p>Over 160 banks and investment groups are involved in another coalition that has agreed to <a href="https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/biggest-financial-players-back-net-zero">put pressure on high-emissions industries</a> by tying lending decisions to the goal of global net-zero emissions by 2050.</p>
<p>Ramping up green financing will require transparent taxonomies, or guidelines, for defining green and clean investments; science-based transition plans for companies and financial institutions; and a hard look at portfolios of financial institutions given the risk of substantial stranded fossil fuel assets, such as coal power plants that haven’t reached the end of their life spans but can no longer be used. </p>
<p>Meeting the <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-banning-financing-for-fossil-fuel-projects-in-africa-isnt-a-climate-solution-169220">transition funding needs of developing economies</a> should be a high priority. </p>
<h2>6) Reduce short-lived greenhouse gases</h2>
<p>The Biden administration <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/11/02/fact-sheet-president-biden-tackles-methane-emissions-spurs-innovations-and-supports-sustainable-agriculture-to-build-a-clean-energy-economy-and-create-jobs/">announced a sweeping set of rules</a> on Nov. 2, 2021, for reducing emissions of methane, a greenhouse gas many times more potent than carbon dioxide that comes from leaking oil and gas infrastructure, coal mines, agriculture and landfills. Methane doesn’t stay in the atmosphere as long, so stopping emissions can have faster climate benefits while carbon emissions are reduced. </p>
<p>The U.S. and the European Union also launched a new global pledge to <a href="https://theconversation.com/biden-eu-urge-30-methane-emissions-cuts-a-move-crucial-for-protecting-climate-and-health-and-it-can-pay-for-itself-168220">cut methane emissions by nearly one-third by 2030</a>. Over 100 countries have <a href="https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/statement_21_5766">signed on</a>.</p>
<p>This type of coalition, based on a tightly focused issue, can bring meaningful emissions reductions in places that are less likely to support broader climate agreements.</p>
<h2>Not one solution</h2>
<p>It is likely that U.N. energy and climate deliberations will continue to move in fits and starts. The real work needs to take place at a more practical implementation level, such as in states, provinces and municipalities. </p>
<p>If there is one thing we have learned, it is that mitigating climate change will be a long slog. While it’s uncontested that <a href="https://irena.org/-/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2021/Jun/IRENA_World_Energy_Transitions_Outlook_2021.pdf?la=en&hash=C2117A51B74EAB29727609D778CDD16C49E56E83">the benefits of greenhouse gas mitigation far exceed the costs</a>, politicians need to show that the many energy transitions emerging are good for economies and communities, and can create long-lasting jobs and tax revenue. </p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="COP26: the world’s biggest climate talks" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/424739/original/file-20211005-17-cgrf2z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/424739/original/file-20211005-17-cgrf2z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424739/original/file-20211005-17-cgrf2z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424739/original/file-20211005-17-cgrf2z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424739/original/file-20211005-17-cgrf2z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424739/original/file-20211005-17-cgrf2z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424739/original/file-20211005-17-cgrf2z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><br>
<strong>This story is part of The Conversation’s coverage of COP26, the Glasgow climate conference, by experts from around the world.</strong>
<br><em>Amid a rising tide of climate news and stories, The Conversation is here to clear the air and make sure you get information you can trust. <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/cop26">Read more of our U.S.</a> and <a href="https://page.theconversation.com/cop26-glasgow-2021-climate-change-summit/">global coverage</a>.</em></p>
<p><em>This article was updated Nov. 4, 2021, with the countries agreeing to phase out unabated coal power and Indonesia’s caveats.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/170979/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Clean energy innovation, giving up coal, cutting methane and getting China and India on board for net-zero can deliver progress at COP26.Dolf Gielen, Director for Technology and Innovation at the International Renewable Energy Agency and Payne Institute Fellow, Colorado School of MinesMorgan Bazilian, Professor of Public Policy and Director, Payne Institute, Colorado School of MinesLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1705362021-10-26T12:19:19Z2021-10-26T12:19:19Z4 key issues to watch with climate negotiations underway at COP26 in Glasgow<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/429945/original/file-20211103-27-okmhgs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C42%2C7117%2C4705&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">U.S. President Joe Biden arrives at a COP26 session in Glasgow, Scotland.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/ClimateCOP26SummitBiden/1e5a0730e8f34c9eabdc806a7089628f/photo">Erin Schaff/The New York Times via AP, Poo</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Glasgow sits proudly on the banks of the river Clyde, once the heart of Scotland’s industrial glory and now a launchpad for its green energy transition. It’s a fitting host for the <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-is-cop26-heres-how-global-climate-negotiations-work-and-whats-expected-from-the-glasgow-summit-169434">United Nations’ climate conference, COP26</a>, where world leaders are discussing how their countries will reduce the greenhouse gas emissions that are driving climate change.</p>
<p><a href="https://fletcher.tufts.edu/people/rachel-kyte">I’ve been involved in climate negotiations</a> for several years as a former senior U.N. official and am in Glasgow for the two-week conference that started Oct. 31, 2021. With heads of state heading home after two days of high-level speeches and announcements, negotiations are underway. Here’s what to watch for. </p>
<h2>Ambition</h2>
<p>At the <a href="https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement">Paris climate conference</a> in 2015, countries agreed to work to keep global warming well below 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 Fahrenheit), aiming for 1.5 C (2.7 F). If COP21 in Paris was the agreement on a destination, COP26 is the review of itineraries and course adjustments.</p>
<p>The bad news is that countries aren’t on track. They were required this year to submit new action plans – known as national determined contributions, or <a href="https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/nationally-determined-contributions-ndcs/nationally-determined-contributions-ndcs">NDCs</a>. The U.N.’s latest tally of all the revised plans submitted in advance of the Glasgow summit puts the world on <a href="https://www.unep.org/resources/emissions-gap-report-2021">a trajectory to warm 2.7 C</a> (4.86 F), well into dangerous levels of climate change, by the end of this century. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/428545/original/file-20211026-15-1foevew.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Chart showing emissions trajectories" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/428545/original/file-20211026-15-1foevew.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/428545/original/file-20211026-15-1foevew.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=345&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/428545/original/file-20211026-15-1foevew.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=345&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/428545/original/file-20211026-15-1foevew.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=345&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/428545/original/file-20211026-15-1foevew.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=434&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/428545/original/file-20211026-15-1foevew.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=434&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/428545/original/file-20211026-15-1foevew.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=434&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The U.N. Environment Programme’s Emissions Gap Report, released Oct. 26, 2021, shows the national pledges so far fall well short of the Paris Agreement goals.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.unep.org/resources/emissions-gap-report-2021">UNEP</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>All eyes are on the G-20, a group of leading world economies that together account for <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-07-23/g-20-ministers-stumble-over-coal-global-warming-targets">almost 80% of global emissions</a>. Their <a href="https://www.g20.org/rome-summit.html">annual summit</a> in Rome on Oct. 30-31, they stopped short of committing to reach net zero emissions by 2050.</p>
<p>Brazil, Mexico, Australia and Russia have filed plans that are not in line with the Paris Agreement. India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced a net zero target of 2070, but significantly committing to 50% energy from renewable sources by 2030. He asked for the international community to help finance that rapid increase and ticked the box on ambition.</p>
<p><a href="https://www4.unfccc.int/sites/ndcstaging/Pages/Party.aspx?party=CHN&prototype=1">China’s updated plan</a> changed little from what it announced a year ago. It currently involves cutting emissions 65% per unit of gross domestic product, a measure known as carbon intensity, by 2030 compared to 2005 levels; moving up the date when the country’s emissions growth will peak to “before 2030” from “around 2030”; and setting industrial production targets for other greenhouse gases, such as methane. That peaking date needs to be 2026 – no later.</p>
<p><iframe id="Fkc6M" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/Fkc6M/26/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>Meanwhile the world’s eyes are on the United States. Opposition from two Democratic senators, <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-sen-joe-manchins-support-for-natural-gas-could-derail-bidens-us-climate-plan-168448">Joe Manchin</a> of West Virginia and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/oct/22/kyrsten-sinema-climate-advocates-exasperated-biden-bill">Kyrsten Sinema</a> of Arizona, forced the Biden administration to <a href="https://www.eenews.net/articles/biden-talks-up-climate-deal-with-manchin/">scrap a plan</a> that would have incentivized utilities to switch to cleaner power sources faster. <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-to-meet-americas-climate-goals-5-policies-for-bidens-next-climate-bill-170705">President Joe Biden’s Plan B, announced less than a week before the summit, may not be enough</a> to reach the United States’ 2030 emissions targets. </p>
<p>The U.S. has been a big impetus behind new announcements on <a href="https://theconversation.com/biden-announces-a-sweeping-methane-plan-heres-why-cutting-the-greenhouse-gas-is-crucial-for-protecting-climate-and-health-168220">curbing methane emissions 30% by 2030</a> and <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2021/11/01/more-than-100-world-leaders-pledge-halt-deforestation-by-2030/">ending deforestation by 2030</a>, but has a way to go in contributions on climate finance.</p>
<h2>Carbon markets</h2>
<p>One leftover task from the Paris conference is to set rules for <a href="https://www.hec.edu/en/knowledge/articles/are-carbon-markets-solution-against-climate-change">carbon markets</a>, particularly how countries can trade carbon credits with each other, or between a country and a private company. </p>
<p>Regulated carbon markets exist from the European Union to China, and voluntary markets are spurring both optimism and concern. Rules are needed to ensure that carbon markets actually drive down emissions and provide revenue for developing countries to protect their resources. Get it right and carbon markets can speed the transition to net zero. Done badly, <a href="https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/carbon-offset-market-booms-despite-nagging-greenwash-concerns">greenwashing</a> will undermine confidence in pledges made by governments and companies alike. </p>
<p>Another task is determining how countries measure and report their emissions reductions and how transparent they are with one another. This too is fundamental to beating back greenwashing. </p>
<p>Also, expect to see pressure for countries to come back in a year or two with better plans for reducing emissions and reports of concrete progress.</p>
<h2>Climate finance</h2>
<p>Underpinning progress on all issues is the question of finance.</p>
<p>Developing countries need help to grow green and adapt to climate change, and they are frustrated that that help has been on a slow drip feed. In 2009 and again in 2015, wealthy countries <a href="https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/06/1094762">agreed to provide $100 billion a year</a> in climate finance for developing nations by 2020, but they <a href="https://www.oecd.org/newsroom/statement-from-oecd-secretary-general-mathias-cormann-on-climate-finance-in-2019.htm">haven’t reached that goal yet</a>. </p>
<p>Just ahead of the summit, the U.K. revealed a <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-cop26-presidency-publishes-climate-finance-delivery-plan-led-by-german-state-secretary-flasbarth-and-canadas-minister-wilkinson-ahead-of-cop26">climate finance plan</a>, brokered by Germany and Canada, that would establish a process for counting and agreeing on what counts in the $100 billion, but it will take until 2023 to reach that figure. </p>
<p>On the one hand it is progress, but it will feel begrudging to developing countries whose costs of adaptation now must be met as the global costs of climate impacts rise, including from heat waves, wildfires, floods and intensifying hurricanes, cyclones and typhoons. Just as <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-01762-w">with the global vaccine rollout</a>, the developing world may wonder whether they are being slow-walked into a new economic divergence, where the rich will get richer and the poor poorer.</p>
<p><iframe id="pgjyf" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/pgjyf/9/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>Beyond the costs of mitigation and adaptation is the question of <a href="https://unfccc.int/topics/adaptation-and-resilience/the-big-picture/introduction-to-loss-and-damage">loss and damage</a> – the innocuous term for the harm experienced by countries that did little to contribute to climate change in the past and the responsibility of countries that brought on the climate emergency with their historic emissions. These difficult negotiations will move closer to center stage as the losses increase. </p>
<p>Public climate finance provided by countries can also play another role <a href="https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2020/06/17/significant-potential-to-increase-impact-of-climate-finance-new-report-finds">through its potential to leverage</a> the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/energy/going-big-and-fast-on-renewables-would-save-trillions-in-energy-costs/2021/09/23/03c9e7f0-1c5a-11ec-bea8-308ea134594f_story.html">trillions of dollars needed</a> to invest in transitions to clean energy and greener growth. Expect big pledges from private sources of finance – pension funds, insurance companies, banks and philanthropies – with their own net zero plans, including <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/22/which-banks-are-increasing-decreasing-fossil-fuel-financing-.html">ending finance</a> <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-17/maine-becomes-first-state-to-order-public-fossil-fuel-divestment?sref=Hjm5biAW">and investments</a> in fossil fuel projects, and financing critical efforts to speed progress.</p>
<h2>It’s raining pledges</h2>
<p>A cross section of the world will be in Glasgow for the conference, and they will be talking about pathways for reducing global carbon emissions to <a href="https://theconversation.com/more-companies-pledge-net-zero-emissions-to-fight-climate-change-but-what-does-that-really-mean-166547">net zero</a> and building greater resilience.</p>
<p>From <a href="https://www.greenbiz.com/article/zero-carbon-fuels-and-marine-shipping-both-will-and-way">emissions-free shipping</a> to <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/guest-post-calculating-the-true-climate-impact-of-aviation-emissions">aviation</a>, from <a href="https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy0351">ending public financing for coal</a> and <a href="https://ukcop26.org/statement-on-international-public-support-for-the-clean-energy-transition/">other fossil fuel projects</a> outside their borders to expanding the use of <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/10/31/fact-sheet-the-united-states-and-european-union-to-negotiate-worlds-first-carbon-based-sectoral-arrangement-on-steel-and-aluminum-trade/">green steel</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/bendable-concrete-and-other-co2-infused-cement-mixes-could-dramatically-cut-global-emissions-152544">cement</a>, from platforms to <a href="https://theconversation.com/biden-urges-countries-to-slash-methane-emissions-30-heres-why-its-crucial-for-protecting-climate-and-health-and-how-it-can-pay-for-itself-168220">reduce methane</a>, to <a href="https://www.unep.org/nature-based-solutions-climate">nature-based solutions</a>, the two-week conference and days leading up to it will see a steady stream of commitments and new groups of countries, nongovernmental organizations and businesses working together.</p>
<p>Keeping track and verifying achievements toward these pledges will be critical coming away from COP26. U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres announced that he will convene experts to help ensure that net-zero pledges are real, and he warned of the dangers of greenwashing. Without that discipline, climate activist <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2TJMpiG5XQ">Greta Thunberg’s “blah blah blah” speech</a> thrown at delegates to a pre-COP meeting in Milan a few weeks ago will continue to echo around the world.</p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="COP26: the world’s biggest climate talks" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/424739/original/file-20211005-17-cgrf2z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/424739/original/file-20211005-17-cgrf2z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424739/original/file-20211005-17-cgrf2z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424739/original/file-20211005-17-cgrf2z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424739/original/file-20211005-17-cgrf2z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424739/original/file-20211005-17-cgrf2z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424739/original/file-20211005-17-cgrf2z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><strong>This story is part of The Conversation’s coverage of COP26, the Glasgow climate conference, by experts from around the world.</strong>
<br><em>Amid a rising tide of climate news and stories, The Conversation is here to clear the air and make sure you get information you can trust. <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/cop26">Read more of our U.S.</a> and <a href="https://page.theconversation.com/cop26-glasgow-2021-climate-change-summit/">global coverage</a>.</em></p>
<p><em>This article was updated Nov. 3 with the new announcements on methane, deforestation and new plans from the U.S. and India.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/170536/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Rachel Kyte does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The world isn’t on track to avoid dangerous climate change, and this year’s climate conference, COP26, is crucial, a former senior UN official writes.Rachel Kyte, Dean of the Fletcher School, Tufts UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1694342021-10-20T17:19:04Z2021-10-20T17:19:04ZWhat is COP26? Here’s how global climate negotiations work and what’s expected from the Glasgow summit<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/427135/original/file-20211019-20-1fljk4s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=125%2C88%2C1663%2C1152&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">U.N. climate summits bring together representatives of almost every country.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/unfccc/49216979356/in/album-72157711934280806/">UNFCCC</a></span></figcaption></figure><p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/que-es-la-cop26-explicamos-como-funcionan-las-negociaciones-sobre-cambio-climatico-y-que-se-espera-de-la-cumbre-de-glasgow-170478">Leer en español</a></em></p>
<p>Over two weeks in November, world leaders and national negotiators will meet in Scotland to discuss what to do about climate change. It’s a complex process that can be hard to make sense of from the outside, but it’s how international law and institutions help solve problems that no single country can fix on its own.</p>
<p>I worked for the United Nations for several years as a law and policy adviser and have been involved in international negotiations. Here’s what’s happening behind closed doors and why people are concerned that COP26 might not meet its goals.</p>
<h2>What is COP26?</h2>
<p>In 1992, countries agreed to an international treaty called <a href="https://unfccc.int/process/the-convention/history-of-the-convention#eq-1">the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change</a> (UNFCCC), which set ground rules and expectations for global cooperation on combating climate change. It was the first time the majority of nations formally recognized the <a href="https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-convention/what-is-the-united-nations-framework-convention-on-climate-change">need to control greenhouse gas emissions</a>, which cause global warming that drives climate change.</p>
<p>That treaty has since been updated, including in 2015 when nations signed the <a href="https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement">Paris climate agreement</a>. That agreement set the goal of limiting global warming to “well below” 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 F), and preferably to 1.5 C (2.7 F), <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/">to avoid catastrophic climate change</a>.</p>
<p>COP26 stands for the 26th Conference of Parties to the UNFCCC. The “<a href="https://unfccc.int/process/parties-non-party-stakeholders/parties-convention-and-observer-states">parties</a>” are the 196 countries that ratified the treaty plus the European Union. <a href="https://ukcop26.org/">The United Kingdom, partnering with Italy,</a> is hosting COP26 in Glasgow, Scotland, from Oct. 31 through Nov. 12, 2021, after a one-year postponement due to the COVID-19 pandemic.</p>
<p><iframe id="FAnL5" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/FAnL5/4/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<h2>Why are world leaders so focused on climate change?</h2>
<p>The U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s latest report, released in August 2021, warns in its strongest terms yet that <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGI_SPM.pdf">human activities have unequivocally</a> warmed the planet, and that climate change is now widespread, rapid and intensifying.</p>
<p>The IPCC’s scientists explain how <a href="https://theconversation.com/climate-change-is-relentless-seemingly-small-shifts-have-big-consequences-166139">climate change has been fueling</a> extreme <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-water-cycle-is-intensifying-as-the-climate-warms-ipcc-report-warns-that-means-more-intense-storms-and-flooding-165590">weather events and flooding</a>, severe <a href="https://theconversation.com/extreme-heat-waves-in-a-warming-world-dont-just-break-records-they-shatter-them-164919">heat waves and droughts</a>, loss and <a href="https://theconversation.com/protecting-half-of-the-planet-is-the-best-way-to-fight-climate-change-and-biodiversity-loss-weve-mapped-the-key-places-to-do-it-144908">extinction of species</a>, and the <a href="https://theconversation.com/ipcc-climate-report-profound-changes-are-underway-in-earths-oceans-and-ice-a-lead-author-explains-what-the-warnings-mean-165588">melting of ice sheets and rising of sea levels</a>. U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres called the report a <a href="https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/08/1097362">“code red for humanity.”</a></p>
<p>Enough greenhouse gas emissions are already in the atmosphere, and they stay there long enough, that <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/#SPM">even under the most ambitious scenario</a> of countries quickly reducing their emissions, the world will experience rising temperatures through at least mid-century.</p>
<p>However, there remains a narrow window of opportunity. If countries can cut global emissions to “<a href="https://theconversation.com/more-companies-pledge-net-zero-emissions-to-fight-climate-change-but-what-does-that-really-mean-166547">net zero</a>” by 2050, that could bring warming back to under 1.5 C in the second half of the 21st century. How to get closer to that course is what leaders and negotiators are discussing.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Guterres standing at a podium with #TimeForAction on the screen behind him" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/427131/original/file-20211019-24-p2pqiy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C2048%2C1361&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/427131/original/file-20211019-24-p2pqiy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427131/original/file-20211019-24-p2pqiy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427131/original/file-20211019-24-p2pqiy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427131/original/file-20211019-24-p2pqiy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427131/original/file-20211019-24-p2pqiy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427131/original/file-20211019-24-p2pqiy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres called the latest climate science findings a ‘code red for humanity.’</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/unfccc/49214530846/in/album-72157711934280806/">UNFCCC</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>What happens at COP26?</h2>
<p>During the first days of the conference, around 120 heads of state, like U.S. President Joe Biden, and their representatives will gather to demonstrate their political commitment to slowing climate change.</p>
<p>Once the heads of state depart, country delegations, often led by ministers of environment, engage in days of negotiations, events and exchanges <a href="https://gizmodo.com/your-guide-to-cop26-the-world-s-most-important-climate-1847845039">to adopt their positions, make new pledges and join new initiatives</a>. These interactions are based on months of prior discussions, policy papers and proposals prepared by groups of states, U.N. staff and other experts.</p>
<p>Nongovernmental organizations and business leaders also attend the conference, and <a href="https://www.ed.ac.uk/sustainability/cop26/what-is-cop26">COP26 has a public side</a> with sessions focused on topics such as the impact of climate change on small island states, forests or agriculture, as well as exhibitions and other events.</p>
<p>The meeting ends with an outcome text that all countries agree to. Guterres <a href="https://news.un.org/en/story/2019/12/1053561">publicly expressed disappointment</a> with the COP25 outcome, and there are <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/sep/27/cop26-climate-talks-will-not-fulfil-aims-of-paris-agreement-key-players-warn">signs of trouble</a> heading into COP26.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Greta Thunberg raises an eyebrow during a session at COP25" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/427139/original/file-20211019-16-1v9qz6p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/427139/original/file-20211019-16-1v9qz6p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=437&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427139/original/file-20211019-16-1v9qz6p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=437&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427139/original/file-20211019-16-1v9qz6p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=437&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427139/original/file-20211019-16-1v9qz6p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=550&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427139/original/file-20211019-16-1v9qz6p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=550&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427139/original/file-20211019-16-1v9qz6p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=550&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Celebrities like youth climate activist Greta Thunberg add public pressure on world leaders.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/unfccc/49193291713">UNFCCC</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>What is COP26 expected to accomplish?</h2>
<p>Countries are required under the Paris Agreement to update their national climate action plans every five years, including at COP26. This year, they’re expected to have ambitious targets through 2030. These are known as <a href="https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/nationally-determined-contributions-ndcs/nationally-determined-contributions-ndcs">nationally determined contributions, or NDCs</a>.</p>
<p>The Paris Agreement requires countries to report their NDCs, but it allows them leeway in determining how they reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. The initial <a href="https://www.wri.org/insights/which-countries-will-strengthen-their-national-climate-commitments-ndcs-2020">set of emission reduction targets in 2015 </a>was far too weak to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius.</p>
<p>One key goal of COP26 is to ratchet up these targets to reach <a href="https://ukcop26.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/COP26-Explained.pdf">net zero carbon emissions</a> by the middle of the century.</p>
<p>Another aim of COP26 is <a href="https://ukcop26.org/cop26-goals/finance/">to increase climate finance</a> to help poorer countries transition to clean energy and adapt to climate change. This is an important issue of justice for many developing countries <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/climate-change-burden-unfairly-borne-by-worlds-poorest-countries/a-40726908">whose people bear the largest burden</a> from climate change but have contributed least to it. Wealthy countries promised in 2009 to contribute <a href="https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/06/1094762">$100 billion a year</a> by 2020 to help developing nations, <a href="https://www.oecd.org/newsroom/statement-from-oecd-secretary-general-mathias-cormann-on-climate-finance-in-2019.htm">a goal that has not been reached</a>. The <a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/us-seeks-double-climate-change-aid-developing-nations-biden-2021-09-21/">U.S.</a>, U.K. and <a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/eu-pledges-extra-4-billion-euros-international-climate-finance-2021-09-15/">EU</a>, among the largest historic greenhouse emitters, are increasing their financial commitments, and banks, businesses, insurers and private investors are being asked to do more.</p>
<p><a href="https://ukcop26.org/cop26-goals/">Other objectives</a> include phasing out coal use and generating solutions that preserve, restore or regenerate natural carbon sinks, such as forests.</p>
<p>Another challenge that has derailed past COPs is agreeing on <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/11/what-is-cop26-and-why-does-it-matter-the-complete-guide">implementing a carbon trading system</a> outlined in the Paris Agreement.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A man stands in a street market smoking, with cooling towers for a power plant behind him." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/427370/original/file-20211019-15-w8tgxw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/427370/original/file-20211019-15-w8tgxw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=411&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427370/original/file-20211019-15-w8tgxw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=411&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427370/original/file-20211019-15-w8tgxw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=411&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427370/original/file-20211019-15-w8tgxw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=516&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427370/original/file-20211019-15-w8tgxw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=516&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427370/original/file-20211019-15-w8tgxw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=516&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Chinese street vendors sell vegetables outside a state-owned coal-fired power plant in 2017.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/chinese-street-vendors-sell-vegetables-at-a-local-market-news-photo/800065596?adppopup=true">Kevin Frayer/Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Are countries on track to meet the international climate goals?</h2>
<p><a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/cma2021_08_adv_1.pdf">The U.N. warned</a> in September 2021 that countries’ revised targets were too weak and would leave the world on pace to <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-58600723">warm 2.7 C</a> (4.9 F) by the end of the century. However, governments are also facing another challenge this fall that could affect how they respond: <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/energy-crisis-fossil-fuel-investment-renewables-gas-oil-prices-coal-wind-solar-hydro-power-grid-11634497531">Energy supply shortages</a> have left Europe and China with price spikes for natural gas, coal and oil.</p>
<p><a href="https://www4.unfccc.int/sites/NDCStaging/pages/Party.aspx?party=CHN">China</a> – the world’s largest emitter – <a href="https://www4.unfccc.int/sites/NDCStaging/pages/Party.aspx?party=CHN&prototype=1">submitted an updated NDC</a> on Oct. 28 with <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/28/climate/china-climate-pledge.html">little change</a> from pledges it announced almost a year ago. Major fossil fuel producers such as <a href="https://www4.unfccc.int/sites/NDCStaging/pages/Party.aspx?party=RUS">Russia</a> and <a href="https://www4.unfccc.int/sites/NDCStaging/pages/Party.aspx?party=AUS">Australia</a> seem unwilling to strengthen their commitments. <a href="https://www4.unfccc.int/sites/NDCStaging/pages/Party.aspx?party=SAU">Saudi Arabia</a> strengthened its targets but <a href="https://www.climatechangenews.com/2021/10/25/saudi-pledges-net-zero-2060-no-oil-exit-plan/">doesn’t count exports of oil and gas</a>, which it says it will continue producing. <a href="https://www4.unfccc.int/sites/NDCStaging/pages/Party.aspx?party=IND">India</a> – a critical player as the second-largest consumer, producer and importer of coal globally – has also not yet committed.</p>
<p>Other developing nations such as Indonesia, Malaysia, South Africa and Mexico are important. So is <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jul/14/amazon-rainforest-will-collapse-if-bolsonaro-remains-president">Brazil, which, under Jair Bolsonaro’s</a> watch, has increased deforestation of the Amazon – the world’s largest rainforest and crucial for biodiversity and removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.</p>
<h2>What happens if COP26 doesn’t meet its goals?</h2>
<p>Many insiders believe that <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/sep/27/cop26-climate-talks-will-not-fulfil-aims-of-paris-agreement-key-players-warn">COP26 won’t reach its goal</a> of having strong enough commitments from countries to cut global greenhouse gas emissions 45% by 2030. That means the world won’t be on a smooth course for reaching net-zero emissions by 2050 and the goal of keeping warming under 1.5 C.</p>
<p>But organizers maintain that keeping warming under 1.5 C is still possible. Former Secretary of State <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-biden-and-kerry-could-rebuild-americas-global-climate-leadership-150120">John Kerry, who has been leading</a> the U.S. negotiations, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/11/john-kerry-cop26-climate-summit-starting-line-rest-of-decade?utm_term=8901953fa850909d49e2c2322006a128&utm_campaign=GuardianTodayUS&utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&CMP=GTUS_email">remains hopeful</a> that enough countries will create momentum for others to strengthen their reduction targets by 2025.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Line chart showing pledges and current policies far from a trajectory that could meet the 1.5C goal." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/427137/original/file-20211019-27-15b72pt.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/427137/original/file-20211019-27-15b72pt.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=279&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427137/original/file-20211019-27-15b72pt.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=279&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427137/original/file-20211019-27-15b72pt.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=279&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427137/original/file-20211019-27-15b72pt.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=351&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427137/original/file-20211019-27-15b72pt.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=351&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/427137/original/file-20211019-27-15b72pt.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=351&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The world is not on track to meet the Paris goals.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://climateactiontracker.org/global/temperatures/">Climate Action Tracker</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The cost of failure is astronomical. Studies have shown that <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/">the difference between 1.5 and 2 degrees Celsius</a> can mean the submersion of small island states, the <a href="https://theconversation.com/coral-reefs-are-dying-as-climate-change-decimates-ocean-ecosystems-vital-to-fish-and-humans-164743">death of coral reefs</a>, extreme heat waves, flooding and wildfires, and pervasive crop failure.</p>
<p>That translates into many premature deaths, more mass migration, major economic losses, large swaths of unlivable land and violent conflict over resources and food – what the U.N. secretary-general has called <a href="https://www.un.org/sg/en/node/259808">“a hellish future.”</a></p>
<p>[<em><a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/politics-weekly-74/?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=politics-important">Get The Conversation’s most important politics headlines, in our Politics Weekly newsletter</a>.</em>]</p>
<p><em>This article was updated Oct. 29, 2021, with China and Saudi Arabia submitting their NDCs.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/169434/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Shelley Inglis does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>A former UN adviser explains what happens at climate summits like COP26 and why people fear this one won’t meet its goals.Shelley Inglis, Executive Director, University of Dayton Human Rights Center, University of DaytonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1692872021-10-06T11:03:09Z2021-10-06T11:03:09ZWhere’s the money? Climate Fight podcast part 1 transcript<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/424977/original/file-20211006-16-xj6gf2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=96%2C179%2C4504%2C2883&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Climate finance: where does the money go?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/world-globe-coins-stack-on-balance-1265133568">CalypsoArt/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>This is a transcript of part 1 of Climate Fight: the world’s biggest negotiation, a series from <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/the-anthill-podcast-27460">The Anthill Podcast</a>. In this episode, <a href="https://theconversation.com/cop26-billions-are-being-spent-tackling-climate-change-where-is-it-all-going-climate-fight-podcast-part-1-169120">Where’s the money?</a> we’re talking about climate finance – money pledged by the world’s richest countries to help the poorest parts of the world adapt to and mitigate the effects of climate change. Where is it being spent and is it really working?</em></p>
<iframe src="https://embed.acast.com/5e3bf1111a6e452f6380a7bc/615c61d3ac6d5900132cd19b" frameborder="0" width="100%" height="190px"></iframe>
<p><iframe id="tc-infographic-564" class="tc-infographic" height="100" src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/infographics/564/df7570dc1ec7680034215f0ca19d2e0378e13f3b/site/index.html" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p><em>NOTE: Transcripts may contain errors. Please check the corresponding audio before quoting in print</em></p>
<hr>
<p>Climate fight: the world’s biggest negotiation is a series supported by <a href="https://www.ukri.org/">UK Research and Innovation</a>, the UK’s largest public funder of research and innovation.</p>
<p>Jack Marley: From wildfires in Algeria, to mega floods in China, the climate crisis is a fact of life no matter where you live on Earth, and we can only tackle it through international cooperation. </p>
<p>In November 2021 Glasgow is hosting COP26 – that’s the United Nations Climate Change Conference. For the 26th time, leaders from around the world will come together to plan how to tackle the most urgent challenge of our time.</p>
<p>But how will countries reduce their greenhouse gas emissions to stop global heating? How will we protect people, their homes and their livelihoods? And how will it be paid for?</p>
<p>From The Conversation, welcome to a new series by The Anthill podcast: <a href="https://theconversation.com/climate-fight-the-worlds-biggest-negotiation-introducing-a-new-podcast-series-168801">Climate Fight: The world’s biggest negotiation.</a> </p>
<p>Jack: I’m Jack Marley – environment editor at The Conversation and based in Newcastle, England. I’m going to take you inside the fight for our future planet.
Over five episodes we’ll speak to experts researching the politics and economics of the climate crisis and working on solutions, and also some of the people living with the consequences. </p>
<p>Because, this yearly climate conference isn’t the only place we negotiate what happens to our planet. That negotiation is happening right now, in every part of the world, among everyone who has a stake in preventing climate breakdown.
This includes you, your neighbours, and people who live on the other side of the world.</p>
<p>And the first place we’re visiting is the coast of East Africa.</p>
<p>On Zanzibar Island, Tanzania, mangroves grow on the beaches and in the shallow ocean water. These are green leafy trees and the species in Zanzibar have roots sticking straight up out of the sand. These mangroves mean a lot to local people.</p>
<p>Biraya Issa Mussa: My name is Biraya Issa Mussa, a resident of Kisakasaka. I’m a mother of five children. </p>
<p>Jack: Biraya spoke to reporter Maryam Charles in Zanzibar. Biraya used to cut the nearby mangroves to make charcoal and firewood. Others used them to build houses, and Biraya would sometimes sell the wood at the market. Mangroves play a big role in the economies of tropical coastal communities around the world. But as Biraya knows, they’re also important to the local environment.</p>
<p>Biraya: We cut mangroves until our water started changing, it started tasting salty. There were places where people stopped farming because of the salty water entering the plantations. We therefore decided to stop cutting them because the water could get into our houses.</p>
<p>Jack: Mangroves filter the salt from sea water through their roots. They can even help protect against sea level rise. And they are one of the best habitats at storing carbon; something that needs to happen in all areas of the world if we’re going to limit global heating. </p>
<p>Several years ago the government of Tanzania and an international climate fund put money towards protecting mangroves. This meant stopping people from cutting down the plants, and people like Biraya lost their source of firewood and income.</p>
<p>Biraya: Even we women used to make charcoal. We no longer get the money we used to get. Since we stopped we’ve not received any support from the government but everyone is doing what they can to survive with the kids back at home. </p>
<p>Jack: The funding the government of Tanzania received is a form of climate finance; that’s money given every year in the order of billions of dollars to help countries adapt or mitigate the effects of climate change. And Biraya’s situation is an example of what can go wrong when local people aren’t properly considered in the way climate finance is spent.</p>
<p>You’re listening to Climate Fight part one — Where’s the money?</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="COP26: the world's biggest climate talks" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/424739/original/file-20211005-17-cgrf2z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/424739/original/file-20211005-17-cgrf2z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424739/original/file-20211005-17-cgrf2z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424739/original/file-20211005-17-cgrf2z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424739/original/file-20211005-17-cgrf2z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424739/original/file-20211005-17-cgrf2z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424739/original/file-20211005-17-cgrf2z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><strong>This story is part of The Conversation’s coverage on COP26, the Glasgow climate conference, by experts from around the world.</strong>
<br><em>Amid a rising tide of climate news and stories, The Conversation is here to clear the air and make sure you get information you can trust. <a href="https://page.theconversation.com/cop26-glasgow-2021-climate-change-summit/"><strong>More.</strong></a></em></p>
<hr>
<p>Jack: Climate breakdown disproportionately impacts people in the global south. In these warm climates, people face droughts and sea-level rise. To add to the injustice — these are usually the people who have contributed the least greenhouse gas emissions that scientists are now certain are causing the climate crisis.</p>
<p>Governments and other public and private sources pledged to give a total of $US100 billion dollars a year to poor countries by 2020, to help mitigate these disasters and to help them cut greenhouse gas emissions. This money goes to lots of different projects, like the protection of certain habitats, or the building of walls to guard against sea-level rise.</p>
<p>But what will spending the money right look like? Who should decide where it goes? And what is the moral and legal weight behind what rich countries owe poor countries? To understand more about what happened in Tanzania, I spoke to the person who researched it.</p>
<p>Jessica Omukuti: My name is Jessica Omukuti and I am COP26 researcher at the University of York, and so my work focuses on climate finance and how it’s delivered in the global south.</p>
<p>Jack: Jessica is one of four UK-based researchers awarded a UKRI COP26 Fellowship ahead of the event in Glasgow. We’ll be hearing from a few more of them throughout this series.</p>
<p>Jessica: The biggest section of discussions of climate finance is how do we support those who are least able to adapt to climate change, but also how do we accelerate mitigation actions.</p>
<p>Jack: In 2018, Jessica spent several months talking to locals in Zanzibar and on the Tanzanian mainland <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0264837719306398?via%3Dihub">about the new mangrove measures,</a> and asking how their lives had changed. The new programme started when Tanzania was looking for a way to protect against sea-level rise and also increase how much carbon it captured.</p>
<p>The Least Developed Countries fund gave them the money for the programme. That’s a small international fund to support the work of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Tanzania used part of the money to replant mangroves, have people make sure the seedlings didn’t die, and patrol to make sure the mangroves weren’t cut down. </p>
<p>Jessica: But then that protection of mangroves prevented communities from continuing to extract other uses from the mangroves. And even though when you look at this from a very high level you say, “Well, you know, there could be other ways for people to generate their income.” </p>
<p>The problem is that the project itself did not think of this, or they probably thought of it but then did not implement alternative measures. For those who lost the most or those who suffered the most from adaptation actions there were very immediate effects that were overlooked, for example losses to livelihoods, health effects because some people could not get the medicines that they required. There were also psychological effects; there were people who would be arrested, who would have their merchandise captured, and those effects were not accounted for when that project was being funded, and so the finance was probably generating harm that was not anticipated and that was not remedied. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Mangroves in Zanzibar." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/424802/original/file-20211005-15-1h9kcm4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/424802/original/file-20211005-15-1h9kcm4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424802/original/file-20211005-15-1h9kcm4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424802/original/file-20211005-15-1h9kcm4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424802/original/file-20211005-15-1h9kcm4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424802/original/file-20211005-15-1h9kcm4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424802/original/file-20211005-15-1h9kcm4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Mangroves in Zanzibar.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/mangrove-forest-jozani-chwaka-bay-national-1026760012">Marius Dobilas/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Khatibu Ali Vuai: My name is Khatibu Ali Vuai, a resident of Kisakasaka, Zanzibar. In our village, the main activity that majority of the people are involved in since the days of our ancestors is cutting mangroves, because this is a resource that was passed on to us by our ancestors. Therefore banning the use of mangroves has greatly affected me. I mainly used it in making charcoal which was my main source of income, taking care of the family and even educating them. We don’t have other means of survival.</p>
<p>Jack: Could you tell us what your main takeaway is from this case study in terms of how climate finance works and how it should work?</p>
<p>Jessica: Climate finance is one of the things that we need to address climate change. The people who suffer the most definitely will need a lot of help to just respond to the risks. But then the thing is climate finance it’s delivered in ways that does not generate the effect that it’s supposed to generate, and usually when people are thinking about we’ve allocated finance to a country like Tanzania and they’ve protected these many square miles of mangroves, in most cases at the international level or even at the national level there’s really very little thought about what does 20 square miles of mangroves mean for a household.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/climate-adaptation-finance-is-ineffective-and-must-be-more-transparent-156469">Climate adaptation finance is ineffective and must be more transparent</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>There’s a lot of research that says that adaptation is local— eventually the choice to adapt will happen at the local level. It’s by that household that says that, “Okay I’m so tired of losing my crops, I will adopt those drought-resistant crops that I see the government displaying around town.” And so the decision to adapt happens at the local level, and so we need systems at different levels to make sure that that decision at the local level is right but also that it does not affect them in a negative way.</p>
<p>Jack: We approached the Global Environment Facility, which manages the Least Developed Countries fund for comment, but are yet to get a response. Our reporter Maryam Charles also spoke to Said Juma Ally, acting director of the forest department in Zanzibar. He told her the government has been assisting local people to generate alternative incomes to cutting mangroves, such as seaweed farming, agriculture, and beekeeping.</p>
<p>Jack: Many different climate funds exist. One of the main ones is the Green Climate Fund, or the GCF. It was created by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change to help developing countries. <a href="https://pcancities.org.uk/outputs-cop26-fellowships">Jessica’s research</a> looked for what could be improved in the fund, and again found that how the project would be carried out at the local level wasn’t a priority.</p>
<p>Jessica: I could not systematically identify how much on the GCF finance so far has been delivered to the local level. The reason why we couldn’t quantify that is because the GCF does not have a very consistent definition of what it means by the “local level”. This is quite important because the GCF in its policies it’s really committed to enabling adaptation at the local level, and because it is a mechanism that is supposed to contribute towards achieving the Paris Agreement, then this is quite important also because the Paris Agreement recognises that adaptation is a local issue, that adaptation needs to happen at the local level.</p>
<p>Jack: Jessica’s analysis of the GCF’s budgets also showed it was difficult to fund projects that give control to local groups on the ground. </p>
<p>Jessica: The GCF works through accredited entities. So accreditation is a process where the GCF kind of in a way vets the organisations that they work with, and the finding was that that the institutions that that are vetted and that eventually get approval to receive funding from the GCF have a capacity gap in working with local institutions to actually implement adaptation that is locally led. And so a lot of the institutions that the GCF works with do not have experience leading locally led adaptation. Instead they claim to be working with local actors, but they still have lots of control over adaptation.</p>
<p>Jack: In response to a request to comment on the issues raised in this story, a spokesperson for the Green Climate Fund told The Conversation that the principle of “country ownership” is crucial under the Paris Agreement. They said that while “respecting that principle, the GCF works in partnership with developing countries and our accredited entities to ensure adaptation action is based on local consultation, engagement and action.” The GCF said its partners “range from tiny island states in the Pacific through to very large African and Asian countries, so the context for what is meant by local action varies hugely.” And that it “works with many ‘direct access’ project partners who can deliver action close to the ground.”</p>
<p>Jack: How important do you think it is to get climate finance right?</p>
<p>Jessica: The urgency of climate change is growing bigger and bigger every day. We need to respond to these effects right now because they will grow bigger. But another thing is that there’s just not enough finance to go around. Developed countries committed to raising $US100 billion per year by 2020, and that was a commitment that was I think in 2009 and they’ve not been able to do that, and that’s why we need to get adaptation finance right. One is because climate change is really urgent. People are dying, people are losing their homes, and it will become even worse as we move forward, but also B is that there’s just not enough finance to be wasted.</p>
<p>Jack: The Conference of the Parties – or COP – has decided that there’s a moral obligation to send this climate finance to areas that need it most.
That’s why at COP26, the issue will be up for debate again. But there’s also a legal obligation for this money to be sent from rich countries to poor countries.</p>
<p>Hapreet Kaur Paul: Most people may be familiar with development aid, but climate finance is conceptually distinct from development aid and it’s distinct because it’s rooted in this recognition in a legal treaty of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.</p>
<p>My name is Harpreet Kaur Paul. I’m a human rights lawyer currently doing a PhD at Warwick Law School on climate justice; that the responsibility of certain countries for causing the climate crisis and the capacity to help solve it is different. This is referred to as the “common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities principle”; it’s enshrined in the 1992 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, acknowledging that different countries have different capabilities and responsibility for addressing climate change.</p>
<p>Developing countries like Bangladesh which are experiencing things like sea-level rise — it’s a low-lying delta country — so sea-level rise means that salty water is coming into farmlands, destroying crops, impacting food security and livelihoods of people, and we know that all of these consequences are increasing in severity and in terms of how regular they are as a result of climate change. And the average person in Bangladesh contributes about ten times fewer emissions than the average person in the UK, 30 times fewer than the average person in the US, Canada or Australia.</p>
<p>Jack: And so where does finance come into that?</p>
<p>Hapreet: First, sticking at the international level at the 2009 Copenhagen climate negotiations, a lot of developing countries came together threatening to walk out largely because of what they perceived as lagging action by the world’s wealthier nations on reducing emissions</p>
<p>Newsclip: I think if you’d made it to Tuvalu you would have realised why we are so concerned about this issue. The entire population of Tuvalu lives below two metres of sea level. I make this as a strong and impassioned plea. We’ve had our proposal on the table for six months. Six months. It’s not the last two days of this meeting. I woke this morning and I was crying. And that’s not easy for a grown man to admit. The fate of my country rests in your hands. Thank you. <em>clapping</em></p>
<p>Hapreet: So, in response developed nations did commit to provide scaled-up new and additional, predictable and adequate funding. And they set a goal of mobilising about US$100 billion per year by last year — 2020 — to address the needs of developing countries, and there’s a lot of divergence of opinions about the extent to which that ambition has been met. And in the absence of really clearly established accounting rules, each developed country has essentially been able to decide what it reports as climate finance. Wealthier countries have said they’re about 80% towards the target, whereas developing countries in civil society tend to put the figure or at around 10% to 15%. </p>
<p>This is mainly as a result of a couple of different issues. First, developed countries count everything, even loans, investments, insurance, and that means that a developed country can give a developing country a loan — say US$50 million — and even though that developing country might have to pay back US$60 million including interest, they can count it as a form of climate finance, which civil society in developing countries say really goes against that initial principle, which was supposed to ensure that developed countries really contributed to solving the problem and helping developing countries adjust, rather than essentially profiting from climate finance. </p>
<p>Jack: How far does this go back? You know, how long have developing countries like Bangladesh been making the case that it’s rich countries like the UK and the US who are most responsible for the crisis?</p>
<p>Hapreet: Very early on, you had small island developing states, arguing that countries least responsible for climate change, and yet most impacted, needed to be protected against having to redress the impacts alone. So in 1991, Vanuatu on behalf of the Alliance of Small Island States proposed a compensation for damages as a result of sea level rise mechanism. </p>
<p>And it wasn’t until the Warsaw COP that ultimately a mechanism came into existence. That was COP19 in 2013, where the G77, which was represented by Bolivia at the time and supported by small island developing states and least developing countries, said that there really needed to be a specific focus on what’s called “loss and damage”, the impacts of climate change that it’s really not possible to adjust to that go beyond what’s possible to adapt to. And since then, there’ve been lots of discussions about what the needs are, but very little action to address them.</p>
<p>Jack: So what legal frameworks can countries like Bangladesh rely on in order to offset these damages?</p>
<p>Hapreet: So, article eight of the Paris Agreement does recognise that loss and damage is occurring and that developing countries need support to address the impacts. Unfortunately, what we have is a context where the scale of de-carbonisation effort, isn’t large enough and we’re on track for escalating loss and damage into the future.</p>
<p>So, what developing countries are now advocating for when thinking about climate finance in the future, now that the US$100 billion by 2020 period is open to new negotiations, is thinking about what climate finance should look like into the future.</p>
<p>But there have also been recognition that those conversations are really, really difficult to have. Developed countries tend not to want to talk about increasing the US$100 billion amount or providing finance for loss and damage, and certainly not in a way that would implicate anything to do with responsibility or accountability. And that’s resulted in countries looking outside of the UNFCCC processes to try and get reparation or damages. </p>
<p>Hapreet: The Philippines has been subjected to super typhoons. Typhoon Haiyan triggered this piece of work that was brought to the Human Rights Commission by Greenpeace and others. The commission’s decision didn’t impose any immediate penalties on the companies that are disproportionately responsible for emissions, but it does set a legal argument for saying that fossil fuel companies and other major polluters could be forced to pay damages. As the scientific basis for the attribution of impacts to disproportionate emissions and increasing the risk of emissions becomes clearer, those types of cases will increase as well. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="People in front of house destroyed by a typhoon." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/424801/original/file-20211005-19-an79tr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/424801/original/file-20211005-19-an79tr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424801/original/file-20211005-19-an79tr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424801/original/file-20211005-19-an79tr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424801/original/file-20211005-19-an79tr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424801/original/file-20211005-19-an79tr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424801/original/file-20211005-19-an79tr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A house destroyed by Typhoon Haiyan on the outskirts of Tacloban on Leyte island in the Philippines.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Tacloban_Typhoon_Haiyan_2013-11-13.jpg">Trocaire via Wikimedia Commons</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Jack: For a lot of reasons, it’s tricky to put a number on how much climate finance would actually be needed for the world to address the climate crisis and its impacts. Different groups have different estimates, but the numbers can get big, starting with the US dollars estimates from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change – or the IPCC.</p>
<p>Hapreet: The IPCC estimates the costs of around US$1.6 to 3.8 trillion to move towards transformative energy systems. Then, given that regardless of whatever level of de-carbonisation mitigation we’re able to engage in, certain climate impacts are now unavoidable. Some of them we can adapt to, and the global commission on adaptation estimates that annual adaptation costs are likely to be about US$180 billion a year going forward. </p>
<p>And then thinking about those that are totally unavoidable. The types of impacts when a storm comes through and people lose their houses, their livelihoods, or homes fall into rivers that are being eroded, or as a result of sea level rise, whole countries, islands, or regions disappearing, and needing a form of repair to be able to rebuild dignified lives after that. Modelling from climate analytics estimates the costs of that type of impact – what we call loss and damage – will be reaching about 300 billion per year by 2030 in the global south alone. </p>
<p>Jack: How do you expect all of these issues to come up at COP26?</p>
<p>Hapreet: There’ll be lots of discussions about whether countries are doing enough to decarbonise and reduce the scale of accelerating climate impacts into the future. But we’ll also have discussions about what climate financing looks into the future. There’s a new finance goal to come into effect from 2025. </p>
<p>And what civil society in a lot of developing countries are calling for is new and additional sources for averting, minimising, and addressing climate change. Some climate-vulnerable forum countries are talking about increasing the goal to US$150 billion per year with US$50 billion being allocated to mitigation, US$50 billion to adaptation, US$50 billion to loss and damage. But as I said earlier, those scales really are Insignificant compared to what’s actually needed. </p>
<p>Jack: Negotiation over climate finance takes a lot of forms. Harpreet says in the year leading up to the event, diplomats will meet with the presidency – this year the UK. Smaller countries like Bangladesh will make their case as part of a bloc of countries; having group positions strengthens their bargaining power. They will make their case during the two weeks at COP as well, but these are closed negotiation rooms which we often only hear about through statements if people are unhappy with the negotiations.</p>
<p>Hapreet: Often developing countries are looking to negotiate as a block of the G77 and China together against developed countries. And that’s when issues are more likely to be heard, unfortunately it’s not so much that those most impacted have a proportional say, unfortunately. And a lot of it has to do with other political power, wealth, that is concentrated in and among those countries that are most responsible. </p>
<p>What’s really important to consider in this context is different types of power. So there’s the kind of political power that early industrialisers have, the power of deciding what gets funded and what doesn’t as a result of economic power as well. And then I think there is a form of moral power, that is brought to bear as well and loss and damage really has leveraged that. And it’s striking to me that when typhoon Haiyan was ravaging the Philippines, the negotiator at the time, I think, Yeb Sano decided to go on a hunger strike and many others joined him in civil society in, in developing countries to really call for a mechanism within the UN process that would take loss and damage seriously.</p>
<p>In showing that kind of colossal devastation in the fact that developing countries are insignificantly responsible historically for the emissions that are exacerbating the storms and the sea level rise and the droughts and wildfires that are occurring, there was a moral power that was leveraged. And I think that is probably something we’re going to see increasingly through the youth movement, on the streets outside of negotiations as much as inside.</p>
<p>Jack: Climate finance has, in the past, been marred by difficult negotiations.
Looking to the future, what can we expect to happen?</p>
<p>Alina Averchenkova: Hello, I’m Alina Averchenkova and I’m a distinguished policy fellow at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics, and my work focuses on climate legislation, climate governance, and implementation of the Paris Agreement.</p>
<p>Jack: Alina’s worked on an assessment of <a href="https://www.un.org/sites/un2.un.org/files/100_billion_climate_finance_report.pdf">how much of the $US100 billion</a> - the target amount to be moving to poor countries each year by 2020 - has actually been met. The data they have is for 2018. </p>
<p>Alina: That’s the latest accounting year that’s available. And to one of such assessments was the technical task team put together by the United Nations Secretary General last year and I was part of that group. And so in our report, we have looked at extrapolating the past trends and also taking into account the impact of the global pandemic. And our assessment was that it’s likely that while we could see a consistent growth in climate change finance mobilised over the past decade, our assessment was that we’re likely to come short for the end of 2020. </p>
<p>Jack: A separate analysis of 2019 from the OECD said climate finance that year totalled <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/sep/20/rich-countries-not-providing-poor-with-pledged-climate-finance-analysis-says?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other">US$80 billion</a>. Remember the goal was US$100 billion per year by 2020. We’re still waiting on the data from that year. </p>
<p>Looking to the future, US President Joe Biden announced in April 2021 that the US <a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/us-double-public-climate-finance-developing-countries-by-2024-2021-04-22/">would double its climate finance</a> commitments by 2024. This is of course after Biden’s predecessor, Donald Trump, withdrew from the Paris Agreement all together and fell back on the US climate finance pledge.</p>
<p>Alina: I think it’s so fantastic to have the United States back to the negotiating table and as part of the Paris Agreement. The United States has always been a major donor. It’s really important that they are coming back and coming back also to climate finance agenda. </p>
<p>Jack: In September, at a United Nations meeting, President Biden<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/09/21/remarks-by-president-biden-before-the-76th-session-of-the-united-nations-general-assembly/"> gave another update.</a></p>
<p>Joe Biden clip: I’m proud to announce that we’ll work with the congress to double that number again. This will make the United States the leader in public climate finance. </p>
<p>Jack: This brings the US total to $US11.4 billion a year by 2024. But some still say that’s not the country’s fair share. The Overseas Development Institute argues the US should be giving upwards of $US43 billion a year, based on its gross national income, cumulative emissions and population.</p>
<p>As we decide how much money there will be for the world’s most vulnerable to adapt and mitigate climate change, we’re at a unique point in history. </p>
<p>Alina: I think on one hand pandemic exacerbated the needs of developing countries and put more pressure on developed countries on their public finance as well. At the same time, I think the recovery from the pandemic offers an immense opportunity because quite significant packages that are being committed globally to recovery from the current crisis. And we have this opportunity to invest into activities and into sectors for recovery that put us on a low-carbon path, which is compatible with the objectives of the Paris Agreement and with the need to come to net zero emissions by the middle of the century.</p>
<p>So it is quite an important point in time and I hope that COP26 will be the place where the world leaders – political leaders, but also financial leaders – would really have that conversation and commit to taking climate into account.</p>
<p>Jack: When we talk about giving money to protect people against climate change, there’s an elephant in the room. We’re still releasing more carbon dioxide and causing more global heating. Global carbon dioxide emissions have been steadily rising. And after falling during the pandemic, the International Energy Agency expects energy-related carbon dioxide emissions to grow by 4.8% in 2021.
We’re fighting a monster while we continue to make that monster bigger. Countries will need to cut emissions or remove carbon dioxide from the air, or both. </p>
<p>And that’s what we’ll explore next time. The path to net zero.</p>
<p>Myles Allen: The only other alternative is to require that anyone still using fossil fuels disposes safely and permanently of the carbon dioxide generated by the fossil fuels they use.</p>
<p>Jack: Thanks to everybody who spoke to us for this episode.</p>
<p>The Anthill is produced by The Conversation in London. You can get in touch with us on on Twitter <a href="https://twitter.com/TC_Audio">@TC_Audio</a>, on Instagram at <a href="https://www.instagram.com/theconversationdotcom/?hl=en">theconversationdotcom</a> or email us on podcast@theconversation.com And you can also sign up for our free daily email by clicking the <a href="https://theconversation.com/newsletter?utm_campaign=PodcastTCWeekly&utm_content=newsletter&utm_source=podcast">link in the show notes</a>.</p>
<p>If you’re enjoying the series, please follow the show, and leave a rating or review wherever podcast apps allow you to. Please tell your friends and family about the show too. </p>
<p>Climate fight: the world’s biggest negotiation is produced for The Conversation by Tiffany Cassidy. Reporting in Zanzibar by Maryam Charles. Sound design is by Eloise Stevens and the series theme tune is by Neeta Sarl. Our editor is Gemma Ware and production help comes from Holly Stevens. Thanks also go to Will de Freitas, Jo Adetunji, Mend Mariwany, Chris Waiting, Khalil Cassimally, Alice Mason and Zoe Jazz at The Conversation. To James Harper and his team at UKRI. And to Imriel Morgan and Sharai White for helping us to promote the series. And thanks also to Dasheen Moodley. </p>
<p>I’m Jack Marley. Thanks for listening. </p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="UK Research and Innovation (UKRI)" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/423510/original/file-20210928-22-3fcpqf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/423510/original/file-20210928-22-3fcpqf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=300&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/423510/original/file-20210928-22-3fcpqf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=300&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/423510/original/file-20210928-22-3fcpqf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=300&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/423510/original/file-20210928-22-3fcpqf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=377&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/423510/original/file-20210928-22-3fcpqf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=377&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/423510/original/file-20210928-22-3fcpqf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=377&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><em>Climate fight: the world’s biggest negotiation is a podcast series supported by <a href="https://www.ukri.org/">UK Research and Innovation</a>, the UK’s largest public funder of research and innovation.</em> </p>
<hr><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/169287/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The Conversation has received support from UK Research and Innovation to make the Climate fight podcast series. Alina Averchenkova has received funding in the past from the UN and from UKRI’s COP 26 fellowship project. She has also acted several times as an independent reviewer on climate finance for the Independent Commissions for Aid Impact. Harpreet Kaur Paul is affiliated with ActionAid. Jessica Omukuti has received funding from the UK's Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) through the Place-Based Climate Action Network, The Leverhulme Trust, UKRI and the University of Oxford's Strategic Research Fund. She is a member of the Expert Review Group of the UNFCCC High Level Champions Race to Resilience and also works with the UNFCCC high level champions team for Africa, CHOOOSE and Sustainable Solutions for Africa. </span></em></p>This is a transcript of part 1 of Climate Fight: the world’s biggest negotiation, a series from The Anthill podcast.Jack Marley, Environment + Energy Editor and Host of the Climate Fight podcast series, The ConversationLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1678672021-09-16T12:11:41Z2021-09-16T12:11:41Z4 strategies for a global breakthrough on energy and climate change<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/421446/original/file-20210915-25-w0b0qb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C83%2C3992%2C2886&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Reducing fossil use and increasing renewable energy worldwide are crucial to both sustainable development and fighting climate change.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/chinese-worker-from-wuhan-guangsheng-photovoltaic-company-news-photo/684080492">Kevin Frayer/Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Two important global events are coming up that are widely hoped to help address what the United Nations calls the “dual challenge” – fighting climate change and ensuring that poorer countries can develop sustainably. Energy is a central theme in both.</p>
<p>For the first time in 40 years, the U.N. General Assembly is convening a <a href="https://www.un.org/en/hlde-2021/page/world-leaders-meet-24-september">global summit of world leaders focused solely on energy</a>. If all goes as planned on Sept. 24, 2021, they will <a href="https://mailchi.mp/un/hlde2021_updateissue13-4937782">consider a road map</a> that includes tripling investment in renewable power and making affordable modern and clean energy available to everyone everywhere within the decade. </p>
<p>The second event is the <a href="https://ukcop26.org/">U.N. climate conference</a> in November, where negotiators representing nations around the world will be asked to ramp up their countries’ efforts to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions.</p>
<p>This year’s climate summit will be the first to assess progress toward meeting the <a href="https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement">2015 Paris climate agreement</a>. There are a few new efforts – President Joe Biden announced on Sept. 17 plans for a U.S. and European Union <a href="https://theconversation.com/biden-eu-urge-30-methane-emissions-cuts-a-move-crucial-for-protecting-climate-and-health-and-it-can-pay-for-itself-168220">pledge to cut methane emissions</a> by 30% within the decade and urged other countries to join – but there are also some remaining sticking points in how nations will meet their promised targets. Resolving these will be important for the credibility of the agreement and the willingness of developing countries to commit to further progress. </p>
<p>As <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=DAwwVkwAAAAJ&hl=en">climate</a> <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=sfI-c0YAAAAJ&hl=en">policy experts</a> with decades of experience in international energy policy, we have identified four strategic priorities that would help provide the foundations for success in cleaning up both energy and climate change. </p>
<h2>What has been achieved so far?</h2>
<p>Despite the ambitious goals in many countries, the world’s greenhouse gas emissions have continued to rise. The year 2020 was a brief exception – <a href="https://www.iea.org/articles/global-energy-review-co2-emissions-in-2020">emissions fell</a> significantly due to the global pandemic – but that trend has already reversed as economies recover.</p>
<p>The statements released by world leaders after the recent <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/g7-climate-and-environment-ministers-meeting-may-2021-communique/g7-climate-and-environment-ministers-communique-london-21-may-2021">G7</a> and <a href="https://www.g20.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/2021_G20-Energy-Climate-joint-Ministerial-Communique.pdf">G20</a> meetings underlined recognition of the problem. Still, very few countries and companies have detailed plans and budgets in place to meet their own high-level goals.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Illustration showing where to cut emissions soonest most efficiently" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/421580/original/file-20210916-21-15niz3l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/421580/original/file-20210916-21-15niz3l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/421580/original/file-20210916-21-15niz3l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/421580/original/file-20210916-21-15niz3l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/421580/original/file-20210916-21-15niz3l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=632&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/421580/original/file-20210916-21-15niz3l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=632&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/421580/original/file-20210916-21-15niz3l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=632&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Meeting the Paris climate agreement goal of keeping global warming under 1.5 C (2.7 F) will require reducing fossil fuels and increasing renewable energy and energy efficiency, as well as keeping carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere with techniques such as carbon capture and storage or use (CCS and CCU).</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">International Renewable Energy Agency</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>4 strategic priorities</h2>
<p>Getting energy and climate policies worldwide headed in the same direction is a daunting task. Here are four strategies that could help countries navigate this space:</p>
<p>1) Deploy carbon pricing and markets more widely.</p>
<p>Only a few <a href="https://carbonpricingdashboard.worldbank.org/">countries, states and regions currently have carbon prices</a> that are high enough to push polluters to cut their carbon dioxide emissions. The climate negotiations in Scotland will focus on getting the rules right for global markets. </p>
<p>Making these markets function well and transparently is essential for effectively meeting the many net zero climate goals that have been announced by countries from <a href="https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/net-zero-pledges-grow">Japan and South Korea to the U.S., China and the European Union</a>. These include rules on the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/sep/16/carbon-offset-projects-carbon-emissions">use of carbon offsets</a> – they allow individuals or companies to invest in projects that help balance out their own emissions – which are currently highly contentious and largely not functional or transparent. </p>
<p>2) Focus attention on <a href="https://www.irena.org/publications/2020/Sep/Reaching-Zero-with-Renewables">the “hard-to-decarbonize” sectors</a>.</p>
<p>Shipping, road freight and industries like cement and steel are all difficult places for cutting emissions, in part because they don’t yet have tested, affordable replacements for fossil fuels. While there are some <a href="https://theconversation.com/bendable-concrete-and-other-co2-infused-cement-mixes-could-dramatically-cut-global-emissions-152544">innovative ideas</a>, competitiveness concerns – such as companies moving production outside regulated areas to avoid regulations – have been a key barrier to progress.</p>
<p>Europe is trying to overcome this barrier by establishing a <a href="https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/12228-EU-Green-Deal-carbon-border-adjustment-mechanism-_en">carbon border adjustment mechanism</a>, with emission levies on imports similar to those for European producers. The Biden administration is also <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-04-23/biden-exploring-border-adjustment-tax-to-fight-climate-change">exploring such rules</a>. </p>
<p>3) Get China and other emerging economies on board.</p>
<p>It is clear that coal, the most carbon-intensive fossil fuel, needs to be phased out fast, and doing so is critical to both the U.N.’s energy and climate agendas. Given that more than <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-climate-change-china-coal/china-generated-over-half-worlds-coal-fired-power-in-2020-study-idUSKBN2BK0PZ">half of global coal</a> is consumed in China, its actions stand out, although other emerging economies such as India, Indonesia and Vietnam are also critical.</p>
<p>This will not be easy. <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/mapped-worlds-coal-power-plants">Notably half of the Chinese coal plants are less than a decade old</a>, a fraction of a coal plant’s typical lifespan. </p>
<p>4) Focus on innovation.</p>
<p>Support for innovation has brought us cutting-edge renewable power and electric vehicles much faster than anticipated. More is possible. For example, <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-us-just-set-ambitious-offshore-wind-power-targets-what-will-it-take-to-meet-them-158136">offshore wind</a>, geothermal, carbon capture and <a href="https://theconversation.com/hydrogen-is-one-future-fuel-oil-execs-and-environmentalists-could-both-support-as-rival-countries-search-for-climate-solutions-159201">green hydrogen</a> are new developments that can make a big difference in years to come.</p>
<p>Who leads in developing these new technologies, and which companies, will reap important economic benefits. They will also support millions of new jobs and economic growth. </p>
<p>Luckily, investors are actively supporting these technologies. More investors are starting to believe in energy transitions and <a href="https://about.bnef.com/blog/energy-transition-investment-hit-500-billion-in-2020-for-first-time/">are putting their money into developing the associated technologies</a>. Still, increased government support for research and development funding can catalyze these efforts.</p>
<p>An opportunity also exists to broaden innovation efforts beyond technology, to a systemic approach that includes dimensions such as <a href="https://www.irena.org/events/2020/Aug/Thirty-Innovations-for-a-Renewable-Powered-Future">market design, social acceptance, equity, regulatory frameworks and business models</a>. Energy systems are deeply interconnected to social issues, so changing them will not be successful if the solutions focus only on technology. </p>
<h2>Not one solution</h2>
<p>It is likely that U.N. energy and climate deliberations over the coming months will continue to move in fits and starts. The real work needs to take place at a more practical implementation level, such as in states, provinces and municipalities. If there is one thing we have learned, it is that mitigating climate change will be a long slog, not a one-off political announcement or celebrity endorsement. It requires much more than simply repeating platitudes.</p>
<p>Politicians need to show that the many energy transitions emerging are good for economies and communities, and can create long-lasting jobs and tax revenues. While it’s uncontested that <a href="https://irena.org/-/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2021/Jun/IRENA_World_Energy_Transitions_Outlook_2021.pdf?la=en&hash=C2117A51B74EAB29727609D778CDD16C49E56E83">the benefits of greenhouse gas mitigation far exceed the cost</a>, it is not always easy to marry this with short-term political cycles. </p>
<p><em>This article was updated Sept. 17, 2021, with Biden’s methane pledge announcement.</em></p>
<p>[<em>The Conversation’s Politics + Society editors pick need-to-know stories.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/politics-weekly-74/?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=politics-need-to-know">Sign up for Politics Weekly</a>._]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/167867/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Energy and climate policies aren’t always headed in the same direction, but if they work together they can tackle two of the biggest challenges of our time.Morgan Bazilian, Professor of Public Policy and Director, Payne Institute, Colorado School of MinesDolf Gielen, Payne Institute Fellow, Colorado School of MinesLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1613322021-05-24T12:10:08Z2021-05-24T12:10:08ZChina finances most coal plants built today – it’s a climate problem and why US-China talks are essential<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/402168/original/file-20210521-21-t6wscu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">China is closing old coal plants but still building new ones – at home and abroad.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/chinese-street-vendors-and-customers-gather-at-a-local-news-photo/800065550">Kevin Frayer/Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>As nations gear up for a critical year for climate negotiations, it’s become increasingly clear that success may hinge on one question: How soon will China end its reliance on coal and its financing of overseas coal-fired power plants?</p>
<p>China represents <a href="https://www.statista.com/statistics/1037051/china-global-carbon-emission-share">more than a quarter</a> of all global carbon emissions, and it has spent tens of billions of dollars to build <a href="https://qz.com/1760615/china-quits-coal-at-home-but-promotes-the-fossil-fuel-in-developing-countries/">coal power facilities</a> in 152 countries over the past decade through its <a href="https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/chinas-massive-belt-and-road-initiative">Belt and Road Initiative</a>. Roughly 70% of the coal plants built globally now rely on Chinese funding.</p>
<p>That’s a problem for the climate. The <a href="https://theconversation.com/iea-report-worlds-leading-energy-adviser-was-founded-to-protect-oil-supplies-now-it-wants-to-ban-new-fossil-fuels-161247">International Energy Agency</a> warns in <a href="https://www.iea.org/news/pathway-to-critical-and-formidable-goal-of-net-zero-emissions-by-2050-is-narrow-but-brings-huge-benefits-according-to-iea-special-report">a new analysis</a> that if the world hopes to reach net zero emissions by 2050, widely seen as necessary to meet the <a href="https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement">Paris climate agreement</a> goals, there should be no investment in new fossil fuel supply projects or in new coal-fired power plants that don’t capture their carbon emissions. Shortly after that report came out, the <a href="http://www.g7italy.it/en/how-does-work/index.html">G7</a> group of leading industrialized democracies <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/988551/g7-climate-environment-communique.pdf">called for an end</a> to international financing of unabated coal projects on May 21, 2021.</p>
<p><iframe id="7P4Vj" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/7P4Vj/7/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>U.S. presidential special climate envoy John Kerry was asked pointedly about China’s progress on climate change when he testified before the House Foreign Affairs Committee in mid-May.</p>
<p>Chinese President Xi Jinping had called climate change a “crisis” during a world leaders’ summit on climate change a few weeks earlier, but Kerry said talks between the two countries grew <a href="https://www.scmp.com/news/world/united-states-canada/article/3133275/john-kerry-says-trusting-china-climate-would-be">“very heated</a>” over China’s continued insistence on financing coal-fired power plants around the world.</p>
<p>While he stopped short of saying it explicitly, Kerry made the U.S. position clear: China’s climate pledges won’t be credible or legitimate until it stops overseas coal financing. “We’ve got five more months left to get them to embrace something we hope you will view as legitimate,” <a href="https://www.c-span.org/video/?511689-1/house-hearing-global-response-climate-change">he said</a>. “We’re not there yet.”</p>
<p>China and the United States together represent <a href="https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/each-countrys-share-co2-emissions">43% of global carbon dioxide emissions</a>. They <a href="https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2014/11/11/us-china-joint-announcement-climate-change">worked together</a> to make the Paris Agreement happen. They will have to push each other to make it a success.</p>
<h2>Closing some coal at home, but building overseas</h2>
<p>China has been the world’s largest carbon emitter for 20 years. It’s been responsible for 28% of the world’s carbon emissions for the past decade. That number <a href="https://www.statista.com/statistics/1037051/china-global-carbon-emission-share/">hasn’t budged</a>, despite rapid growth of China’s renewable energy and clean tech industries.</p>
<p>One of the central reasons is coal, <a href="https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=73&t=11">the most carbon-intensive fossil fuel</a>. Coal accounted for 58% of China’s total primary energy consumption <a href="https://www.eia.gov/international/analysis/country/CHN">as recently as 2019</a> – even as coal use was collapsing elsewhere. China currently operates 1,058 coal plants, roughly half of all coal plants worldwide. To meet even its modest climate goals, it will have to shut down more than half of them, according <a href="https://www.transitionzero.org/insights/turning-the-supertanker">to a recent analysis by TransitionZero</a>, a U.S.-based thinktank.</p>
<p>But will it?</p>
<p>China has incentive to cut emissions. With air pollution choking some of its largest cities, it has <a href="https://endcoal.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/BoomAndBust_2020_English.pdf">shuttered dozens of old coal facilities</a> in recent years, and has subsidized <a href="https://www.pv-magazine.com/2020/10/23/its-cheaper-to-build-new-solar-than-it-is-to-operate-coal-plants/">renewable energy</a> projects, both domestically and globally.</p>
<p>But despite this progress, China is <a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/chinas-new-coal-power-plant-capacity-2020-more-than-3-times-rest-worlds-study-2021-02-03/">still building new coal plants</a>.</p>
<p>It has also made a strategic decision to export its industrial and manufacturing might across the globe under its Belt and Road Initiative. Japan and South Korea, which traditionally financed overseas coal projects, have started to <a href="https://www.vox.com/22151710/china-japan-south-korea-climate-change-coal-finance">abandon them</a>, and China sees opportunity. Nearly all of the 60 new coal plants planned across Eurasia, South America and Africa –70 gigawatts of coal power in all – are financed <a href="https://qz.com/1760615/china-quits-coal-at-home-but-promotes-the-fossil-fuel-in-developing-countries/">almost exclusively</a> by Chinese banks.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Construction workers in hard hats pass a sign urging them to work safely" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/402180/original/file-20210521-13-mrkxht.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/402180/original/file-20210521-13-mrkxht.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/402180/original/file-20210521-13-mrkxht.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/402180/original/file-20210521-13-mrkxht.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/402180/original/file-20210521-13-mrkxht.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/402180/original/file-20210521-13-mrkxht.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/402180/original/file-20210521-13-mrkxht.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Pakistani workers walk at the construction site of a Chinese-backed coal-fired power plant in Pakistan in 2018. It’s part of China’s Belt and Road Initiative.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/this-picture-taken-on-may-23-2018-shows-pakistani-workers-news-photo/1061545812">Rizwan Tabassum/AFP via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>It’s clear that China is juggling energy security and economic growth concerns. That’s why analysts were <a href="http://cnbc.com/2020/09/23/china-claims-it-will-be-carbon-neutral-by-the-year-2060.html">surprised when Xi announced</a> in late 2020 that China would be carbon neutral by 2060, a decade earlier than planned, and make sure its carbon emissions peaked before 2030.</p>
<p>Such an effort would require <a href="https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3121426/china-coal-why-it-so-important-economy">huge investments</a> in renewable energy, electric cars and technology like <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-earth-needs-multiple-methods-for-removing-co2-from-the-air-to-avert-worst-of-climate-change-121479">carbon capture and storage</a>. None of this will be easy for China. The country has made little progress on reducing emissions, according to recent <a href="https://www.iea.org/countries/china">reports from organizations including the International Energy Agency</a>.</p>
<h2>US-China talks</h2>
<p>Seasoned climate negotiators are watching what China does with coal today – not just the pledges it makes that are 10 or even 20 years in the future.</p>
<p>The U.S.-China climate relationship was central to reaching the Paris climate agreement, Todd Stern, former U.S. climate negotiator, <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/articles/can-the-united-states-and-china-reboot-their-climate-cooperation/">has said</a>. Failure to revive such engagement “would have grave national security consequences in the United States and around the world.” </p>
<p><iframe id="yM917" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/yM917/8/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>Shortly before the recent world leaders’ summit on climate change, the United States and China <a href="https://www.npr.org/2021/04/18/988493971/u-s-china-agree-to-cooperate-on-climate-crisis-with-urgency">agreed to work together again</a> on the climate issue, and U.S. President Joe Biden <a href="https://theconversation.com/new-us-climate-pledge-cut-emissions-50-this-decade-but-can-biden-make-it-happen-158869">announced ambitious new climate plans</a></p>
<p>But talk isn’t action. The world will expect both to commit to measurable actions ahead of the <a href="https://ukcop26.org/">United Nations climate summit in November</a>. Countries are expected to strengthen their pledges this year – hopefully enough to keep global warming in check. </p>
<p><a href="https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/about/people-partners/jeff-nesbit/">I worked</a> in both the George W. Bush and Barack Obama administrations and have been involved in climate change issues for several years. It’s clear that if China and the U.S. don’t lead the way, the world won’t get on track to meet the Paris climate goals. </p>
<h2>China has reason to cooperate on climate change</h2>
<p>China is already planning for a world in which fundamental natural resources like water and food grow scarce because of climate change. For example, when China saw a looming threat to its ability to grow enough soybeans, due in part to climate change, it went from importing virtually no soybeans to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/18/opinion/climate-change-saudi-arabia-water.html">importing more than half</a> the soybeans sold on Earth. I outline the reasons for this tectonic shift in my book “<a href="https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781250160461">This is the Way the World Ends</a>.”</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A boat pulls a large section of solar panels into place among others on the large lake." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/402172/original/file-20210521-17-ms2xhx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/402172/original/file-20210521-17-ms2xhx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=392&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/402172/original/file-20210521-17-ms2xhx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=392&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/402172/original/file-20210521-17-ms2xhx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=392&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/402172/original/file-20210521-17-ms2xhx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=493&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/402172/original/file-20210521-17-ms2xhx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=493&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/402172/original/file-20210521-17-ms2xhx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=493&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">China has built a thriving clean energy industry as the leading maker of solar panels, like these on a lake that was once a coal mine.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/boat-pulls-a-group-of-solar-panels-to-be-connected-to-a-news-photo/800065502">Kevin Frayer/Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>China also sees economic opportunity in solving the climate crisis. It is mining <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-us-is-worried-about-its-critical-minerals-supply-chains-essential-for-electric-vehicles-wind-power-and-the-nations-defense-157465">raw materials</a> essential to battery storage solutions at the heart of a global renewable energy industry; building <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/04/business/china-electric-cars.html">cheap electric vehicles</a> as fast as it can for domestic and foreign consumers; and aggressively subsidizing <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-02-04/china-solar-industry-sets-sights-on-record-2021-after-green-push">solar panel manufacturing</a> and exporting those panels worldwide. </p>
<p>China lost the tech revolution race that defined the global economy of the 20th century. It does not intend to lose the renewable energy and clean tech revolution that will define the 21st.</p>
<p>But even that imperative has not kept China from financing the world’s reliance on coal-fired power. Which is why climate negotiators hope China does more than make promises for the future. Ending coal financing overseas would be a serious first step in that direction.</p>
<p>[<em>Get the best of The Conversation, every weekend.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/weekly-highlights-61?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=weeklybest">Sign up for our weekly newsletter</a>.]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/161332/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jeff Nesbit is affiliated with Climate Nexus, a not-for-profit communications group dedicated to highlighting the impacts of climate change and clean energy solutions in the United States.</span></em></p>A report from top energy analysts warns that to meet the Paris climate agreement goals, investment in new unabated coal plant projects should stop now.Jeff Nesbit, Research Affiliate, Yale Program on Climate Change Communications, Yale UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1594572021-04-21T15:43:26Z2021-04-21T15:43:26ZQ+A: Joe Biden’s Earth Day summit – what could it achieve for action on climate change?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/396292/original/file-20210421-17-1mmyrh1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C1198%2C630&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/143528404@N04/50559523112/in/photolist-2k2LLKJ-2ieZWHo-2k2GkyL-7PSMC3-2gv9ieB-2gAV5nE-7f6MAn-ch6i4y-2h46wXZ-e3q1ox-ch6i1J-c5HRjf-2gY3Xtc-2h46mCL-2gvUMxt-2k4q5nx-2h46ri2-2gYxP7E-2itqaYD-2h86otr-2gv9Ld7-2if3qdH-2kMRbfP-2ivodQE-2igHz5y-5iQ7ap-2itrmxZ-5vfQh4-2k3y9jv-2k3X7XY-2iafYx8-2h1heYp-2kp99J5-2h88hjr-2h86rUV-2gv9Nfy-2k4o6fK-2gAVCWy-2gAVD2P-8Bi8fj-2gY4zT7-8Bez7c-2kzuPaj-CVSDkD-2igL3MM-2hTaZ4a-2hT9XhW-2hTb31T-2k2Gkta-mHfN3">Jlhervàs/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>To mark the <a href="https://theconversation.com/earth-day-at-50-what-the-environmental-holiday-means-today-136415">first Earth Day</a> on April 22 1970, the then US president, Richard Nixon, planted a tree on the White House lawn. More than five decades later, a much greater task falls to the current occupant of the Oval Office.</p>
<p>Joe Biden has invited 40 world leaders to take part in a two-day virtual gathering that will commence on April 22. With just over six months before countries meet in Glasgow for the UN’s annual climate summit, Biden will be hoping to tease more radical commitments for reducing emissions from his guests and give international negotiations a shot in the arm.</p>
<p>The stakes, as ever, are high. Despite a brief reprieve during the lockdowns in 2020, global carbon emissions are set to come <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/apr/20/carbon-emissions-to-soar-in-2021-by-second-highest-rate-in-history">roaring back in 2021</a> to near their pre-pandemic peak.</p>
<p>So what is the most that can come from the Earth Day summit? And how will we know if it was a success?</p>
<h2>What’s the point of a summit before COP26?</h2>
<p>After four years of the US being effectively absent from climate negotiations, Biden’s summit is clearing the ground for countries to reach stronger targets at the UN’s Conference of the Parties in November 2021, also known as COP26. The summit is meant to send a message that the US is not only <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-the-us-rejoining-the-paris-climate-accord-matters-at-home-and-abroad-5-scholars-explain-153783">back in the Paris Agreement</a>, but keen to be back at the helm leading international efforts.</p>
<p>An agreement between the then US president Barack Obama and China’s president Xi Jinping in late 2014 broke the political deadlock between developed and developing countries following the diplomatic failure of COP15 in Copenhagen. Their bilateral agreement set the stage for global consensus in 2015, at COP21 in Paris, when all countries agreed to nationally determined contributions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in line with limiting global temperature rise to 2°C (updated to 1.5°C in 2018). </p>
<p>On his recent visit to China, the special presidential envoy for climate, John Kerry, spoke with the country’s chief climate negotiator, Xie Zhenhua. By meeting Zhenhua prior to the renewal of the Paris Agreement, Kerry and the Biden administration are showing the world that a similar breakthrough is possible at COP26, through cooperation between its two biggest greenhouse gas emitters.</p>
<p>Despite their deep antagonism on issues such as trade and human rights, cooperation between the US and China is intended to set a strong example to other countries in the run up to COP26, particularly the next largest emitters who have yet to set more ambitious targets for reducing emissions.</p>
<h2>What might a good outcome from the summit look like?</h2>
<p>The first good outcome arrived early. Following pressure from scientists and environmental groups, Biden committed the US to a 2030 target of reducing its greenhouse gas emissions by <a href="https://apnews.com/article/politics-government-and-politics-environment-and-nature-business-climate-8b27e89270de7cb03f2e61f23d0ba4b9">50% compared to 2005 levels</a> on the eve of the summit – more than twice as ambitious as <a href="https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2014/11/11/us-china-joint-announcement-climate-change">Obama’s target of 28% in 2014</a>.</p>
<p>Following the terms of <a href="https://www.state.gov/u-s-china-joint-statement-addressing-the-climate-crisis">the recent agreement</a> between Kerry and Zhenhua, the US might coax Jinping to publicly confirm his pledge of September 2020 that China will achieve carbon neutrality “before 2060” and reach “peak carbon emissions by 2030”. </p>
<p>Another good outcome from the summit would be for the US and Chinese leadership to cooperate on measures to achieve their updated targets during the next few years. The next largest emitters, India and Russia, could choose to follow suit and submit updated targets for the next decade.</p>
<p>Finally, the countries with the lowest emissions which have been invited to the summit, including Bangladesh and an array of small island states, could gain a more concrete sense of the resources that bigger emitters are willing to commit to help them adapt to climate change. The four outcomes, together, would certainly help pave the way for COP26 to achieve its climate ambition in the autumn.</p>
<h2>What are the obstacles to that?</h2>
<p>Leading by example can backfire. Much has happened in international and domestic politics since 2014. Many countries will be wary of diplomatic moves by the US in the short term. After all, what happens to these promises after the 2022 Congressional elections when Republicans may regain Congress? Several countries from the Global South will have plenty of their own reasons to be suspicious of the US in a global leadership role. </p>
<p>Past resistance to the ambitions of the US (as at COP15) could reemerge despite the increasing threat of climate catastrophe, reversing the virtuous circle of diplomatic peer rivalry among states. This summit constitutes a leap of faith on the part of its host and an ambivalent wager on the part of its guests. The summit will decide the direction of that wager.</p>
<h2>Which are the countries to watch and why?</h2>
<p>There are four sets of countries to watch during the summit. </p>
<p>First, the US and China – their ambition will hopefully spur the next biggest emitters, the EU, India and Russia. The response of the last two will be particularly interesting – will they agree to hop on the bandwagon? Third, countries such as Australia, Canada, Japan and South Korea, which all have a stake in the climate leadership of the US due to the nature of their relationships with China, but have not yet updated their targets.</p>
<p>Finally, those countries most vulnerable to the near-term effects of climate change, such as Bangladesh, Jamaica and Kenya. Will they sign off on any of the summit’s supposed achievements?</p>
<h2>What can Biden’s first three months tell us about his climate plan?</h2>
<p>The Biden administration’s approach – his cabinet appointments overall, the stimulus packages, the cross-departmental consultations – is serious, comprehensive and integrated. As I and a colleague <a href="https://theconversation.com/climate-change-joe-biden-could-ride-a-wave-of-international-momentum-to-break-deadlock-in-us-149121">recently suggested</a>, the US president’s international commitments to climate are critical to the success of his domestic agenda. That’s another major reason for holding this summit now.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/159457/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Richard Beardsworth does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Plus how to interpret the outcome of the pre-COP26 summit.Richard Beardsworth, Professor of International Politics, University of LeedsLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1592012021-04-20T12:30:16Z2021-04-20T12:30:16ZHydrogen is one future fuel oil execs and environmentalists could both support as rival countries search for climate solutions<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/395881/original/file-20210419-13-rdwlwe.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C4%2C3136%2C2045&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Many oil companies are still planning for fossil fuel use to continue well into the future.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/the-total-oil-refinery-is-seen-on-january-10-2007-in-leuna-news-photo/72976739">Katja Buchholz/Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Tehran, 1943: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tehran_Conference#/media/File:Tehran_Conference,_1943.jpg">Joseph Stalin, Franklin D. Roosevelt and Winston Churchill</a> – hosted by the young Shah Reza Pahlavi – agree on plans for the two-front attack on Hitler while sketching out the east-west division of Europe. Holding the meeting in Iran, with separate consultations with the shah, was no mistake. Gulf oil was a critical resource to the Allied war effort. Oil has flowed under the surface of political conflicts ever since.</p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="The three leaders sitting in chairs on a portico" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/395605/original/file-20210419-19-1u6tp6b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=5%2C15%2C1272%2C929&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/395605/original/file-20210419-19-1u6tp6b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=451&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/395605/original/file-20210419-19-1u6tp6b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=451&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/395605/original/file-20210419-19-1u6tp6b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=451&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/395605/original/file-20210419-19-1u6tp6b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=567&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/395605/original/file-20210419-19-1u6tp6b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=567&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/395605/original/file-20210419-19-1u6tp6b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=567&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Soviet leader Joseph Stalin, U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt and Britain’s Winston Churchill during the Tehran Conference.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.history.navy.mil/content/history/museums/nmusn/explore/photography/wwii/wwii-conferences/tehran-conference/lc-lot-11597-3.html">U.S. Army/Library of Congress</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Fast-forward to today, and political antagonists and energy players are again forging a messy path forward, this time focused on long-term energy transitions as disparate countries try to slow and eventually stop climate change. </p>
<p>The 2015 <a href="https://www.wri.org/climate/expert-perspective/paris-agreement-strategy-longer-term">Paris Agreement</a> was a groundbreaking diplomatic effort – 196 countries committed to prevent average temperatures from rising by more than 2 C (3.6 F), with an aim of less than 1.5 C (2.7 F). To meet that goal, scientists argue that <a href="https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/global-greenhouse-gas-emissions-data">fossil fuel use</a> will have to reach <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/chapter/spm/">net zero emissions by midcentury</a>.</p>
<p>The genius of the Paris climate accord was getting all the major parties to agree – particularly major greenhouse gas emitters including Russia, China, India, Brazil and members of <a href="https://www.opec.org/opec_web/en/about_us/25.htm">OPEC</a>, the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries.</p>
<p>Now, the challenge is implementing the multiplicity of solutions needed to bend the global warming curve. The Paris Agreement is not a treaty – countries set their own targets and determine their own strategies for meeting them. Each signatory has its own politics, economic structure, energy resources and climate exposure.</p>
<p>The commitments from countries are <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/un-new-national-climate-pledges-will-only-cut-emissions-by-2-over-next-decade">still falling short</a> as President Joe Biden hosts a virtual climate summit with international leaders on Earth Day, April 22, 2021, and <a href="https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-climate-shanghai-climate-change-john-kerry-905125d79b6c31940b8747df86c2a87a">carries out the hard diplomatic work</a> with Russia, China and other countries to develop implementable solutions.</p>
<p>As an <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=stkd94IAAAAJ&hl=en">energy economist</a>, I am familiar with countries’ evolving responses to climate change and companies’ shifting investments and different visions of the future. One technology attracting attention from groups on all sides is hydrogen.</p>
<p><iframe id="yM917" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/yM917/7/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<h2>Different visions of energy’s future</h2>
<p>As the world’s population and economies grow, energy demand is expected to <a href="https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=41433">increase by as much as 50%</a> over the next 30 years, so making the right long-term investments is crucial.</p>
<p>Energy companies and policymakers have widely different visions of that future. Their long-term scenarios show that most expect fossil fuel demand to remain steady for decades and possibly decline. However, many are also <a href="https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/news-and-insights/press-releases/from-international-oil-company-to-integrated-energy-company-bp-sets-out-strategy-for-decade-of-delivery-towards-net-zero-ambition.html">increasing</a> their <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2019.100370">investments in cleaner</a> technologies.</p>
<p>The International Energy Agency – which countries often look to for future scenarios, but which has a history of underestimating demand and clean energy – <a href="https://www.iea.org/reports/renewable-energy-market-update/2020-and-2021-forecast-overview">forecasts that renewable energy</a> will meet about one-third of the global energy demand by 2040 in its most optimistic scenario. That would be in a world with higher carbon taxes and more wind power, solar power, electric vehicles, carbon capture and storage. Greener technologies may come close to keeping warming under 2 C, but not quite.</p>
<p><iframe id="vPIzn" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/vPIzn/3/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>Exxon, on the other hand, forecasts a <a href="https://corporate.exxonmobil.com/Energy-and-innovation/Outlook-for-Energy">path dependent on a fossil fuel-based economy</a>, with slower transitions to electric vehicles, steady demand for oil and gas, and a warmer world. Exxon is also investing in carbon capture and storage and hydrogen, but it believes oil and gas will provide <a href="https://corporate.exxonmobil.com/News/Newsroom/News-releases/2020/1021_Darren-Woods-discusses-future-of-industry-and-company-with-employees">half the global energy supply</a> in 2040 and renewable energy will be less than one-fifth.</p>
<p>OPEC, whose members are among the most exposed to climate change and dependent upon oil and gas, also sees oil and gas dominating in the future. Nonetheless, several Gulf nations are also investing heavily in alternative technologies – including nuclear, solar, wind and hydrogen – and trying to transition away from oil.</p>
<p>BP proposes a more focused shift toward cleaner energy. Its “<a href="https://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/business-sites/en/global/corporate/pdfs/energy-economics/energy-outlook/bp-energy-outlook-2020-presentation-with-script.pdf">rapid scenario</a>” forecasts flat energy demand and a more dramatic swing to renewables combined with a growing hydrogen economy. <a href="https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/news-and-insights/press-releases/from-international-oil-company-to-integrated-energy-company-bp-sets-out-strategy-for-decade-of-delivery-towards-net-zero-ambition.html">The company expects</a> its own renewable energy to go from 2.5 gigawatts in 2019 to 50 GW by 2030, and its oil production to fall by 40%.</p>
<p>Others are also exploring hydrogen’s potential. Much as with utilities’ shift from coal to natural gas, hydrogen may ease the transition to cleaner energy with enough investment.</p>
<p>Since this fuel is getting so much industry attention, let’s look more closely at its potential.</p>
<h2>How realistic is hydrogen as a climate solution?</h2>
<p>Hydrogen <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-020-0891-0">has the potential</a> to fuel cars, buses and airplanes, heat buildings and serve as a base energy source to balance wind and solar power in our grids. <a href="https://www.bmbf.de/files/bmwi_Nationale%20Wasserstoffstrategie_Eng_s01.pdf">Germany sees it as a potential substitute</a> for hard-coal coke in making steel. It also offers energy companies a future market using processes they know. It can be liquefied, stored, and transported through existing pipelines and LNG ships, with some modifications. </p>
<p>So far, however, hydrogen is <a href="https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/hydrogen/">not widely used</a> as a clean-energy solution. First, it requires a upfront investment – including carbon capture capacity, pipeline modifications, industrial boilers for heat rather than gas, and fuel cells for transportation – plus policies that support the transition.</p>
<p>Second, for hydrogen to be “green,” the electricity grid has to have zero emissions.</p>
<p>Most of today’s hydrogen is <a href="https://www.iea.org/fuels-and-technologies/hydrogen">made from natural gas</a> and is known as “grey hydrogen.” It is produced using high-temperature steam to split hydrogen from carbon atoms into methane. Unless the separated carbon dioxide is stored or used, grey hydrogen results in the same amount of climate-warming CO2 as natural gas.</p>
<p>“Blue hydrogen” uses the same process but captures the carbon dioxide and stores it so only <a href="https://about.bnef.com/blog/liebreich-separating-hype-from-hydrogen-part-one-the-supply-side/">around 10%</a> of the CO2 is released into the atmosphere. “Green hydrogen” is produced using renewable electricity and <a href="https://www.energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/hydrogen-production-electrolysis">electrolysis</a>, but it is twice as expensive as blue and dependent on the cost of electricity and available water.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/gEByrL5a27c?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Many electric utilities and energy companies, including <a href="https://www.shell.com/energy-and-innovation/new-energies/hydrogen.html">Shell</a>, <a href="https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/news-and-insights/press-releases/bp-plans-uks-largest-hydrogen-project.html">BP</a> and <a href="https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/market-insights/latest-news/electric-power/022221-saudi-aramco-sees-hydrogen-market-gaining-momentum-after-2030">Saudi Aramco</a>, are actively exploring a transition to a hydrogen-mixed economy, with a focus on blue hydrogen as an interim step. Europe, with its dependence on imported natural gas and higher electricity costs, is <a href="https://www.wri.org/news/2020/12/statement-european-council-endorses-55-emissions-cut-2030-leads-race-toward-net-zero">setting ambitious net-zero energy targets</a> that will incorporate a mix of <a href="https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy-environment/news/lawmakers-support-low-carbon-hydrogen-stay-mute-on-nuclear/">blue and green hydrogen</a> coupled with wind, solar, nuclear and an integrated energy grid.</p>
<p>China, the world’s largest energy user and greenhouse gas emitter, is instead investing heavily in natural gas – which has <a href="https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=73&t=11">about half the carbon dioxide emissions</a> of coal – along with carbon capture and storage and a growing mix of solar and wind power. Russia, the second-largest natural gas producer after the U.S., is expanding its gas production and exports to Asia. Some of that gas may end up as blue hydrogen.</p>
<p>[<em>Over 100,000 readers rely on The Conversation’s newsletter to understand the world.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/the-daily-3?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=100Ksignup">Sign up today</a>.]</p>
<p>Ramping up blue and green hydrogen as clean-energy solutions will require substantial investments and long-term modifications to energy infrastructure. In my view, it is not the magic bullet, but it may be an important step.</p>
<h2>Finding solutions amid messy politics</h2>
<p>Of course, technology investments cannot assume away the messy politics of the world. People and leaders around the globe still have <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2015/11/05/2015-climate-change-survey-presentation/">differing views on the urgency</a> of the climate crisis and need for greener energy investments.</p>
<p>Perhaps the leaders gathered will find some common ground as <a href="https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/sea-level/">seas rise</a> and <a href="https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/">temperatures break records</a>. What is critical for meeting the Paris goals is that countries invest now in a cleaner future.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/159201/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>John Ballantine does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The genius of the Paris climate agreement was getting major oil producing countries to agree to a target, but they still have widely different views of energy’s future.John Ballantine, Professor of International Business, Brandeis UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1087312018-12-18T11:49:59Z2018-12-18T11:49:59ZCargo ships are emitting boatloads of carbon, and nobody wants to take the blame<p>Maritime shipping transports <a href="http://www.ics-shipping.org/shipping-facts/shipping-and-world-trade">90 percent of the goods traded</a> around the world by volume. Moving large amounts of goods such as oil, computers, blue jeans and wheat across oceans drives the global economy, making it <a href="https://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/page1-econ/2017/11/01/does-international-trade-create-winners-and-losers/">cheaper and easier</a> to buy almost anything. </p>
<p>But hauling goods around by sea requires roughly <a href="http://www.airclim.org/acidnews/new-figures-global-ship-emissions">300 million tons</a> of <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-urgency-of-curbing-pollution-from-ships-explained-94797">very dirty fuel</a>, producing <a href="http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Environment/PollutionPrevention/AirPollution/Documents/Third%20Greenhouse%20Gas%20Study/GHG3%20Executive%20Summary%20and%20Report.pdf#page=32">nearly 3 percent of the world’s carbon dioxide emissions,</a> giving the international maritime shipping industry roughly the <a href="https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/en/indicator-greenhouse-gas-emissions#textpart-1">same carbon footprint as Germany</a>. </p>
<p>At summits like the COP24 meeting held in <a href="https://theconversation.com/cop24-12-years-from-disaster-editors-guide-to-what-our-academic-experts-say-is-needed-to-fight-climate-change-107997">Poland in December of 2018</a> and in agreements such as the one struck in <a href="https://theconversation.com/paris-agreement-on-climate-change-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly-52242">Paris in 2015</a>, national governments have largely ignored the carbon dioxide emissions from international shipping entering the atmosphere.</p>
<p>This is a real problem because if no country is held responsible for emissions, no government will try to reduce them. We believe as <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=qx-wMsUAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">scholars of global environmental cooperation</a> that one way forward is to make <a href="https://open.bu.edu/handle/2144/22742">international maritime shipping emissions</a> the responsibility of specific countries with the goal of increasing pressure to encourage emission reductions. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/TS2cszwTTcg?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">This video by Rebecca Cowing and David Dunn illustrates what’s wrong with the way the world keeps track of carbon dioxide emissions from international cargo ships.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>A globalized industry</h2>
<p>In international climate change negotiations, countries are in charge of reducing their own greenhouse gas emissions. Carbon dioxide emissions from international shipping could be added to this responsibility. Figuring out whose emissions they are, however, is no easy task.</p>
<p>Perhaps no industry <a href="http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Safety/Pages/Default.aspx">is as globalized as maritime shipping</a>. The ships themselves have <a href="https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/flagging-standards">international webs of owners</a>, <a href="http://www.themaritimepost.com/top-10-biggest-shipping-companies-world/">operators</a> <a href="https://www.hg.org/ship-registration.html">and registrations</a>. They carry goods sourced in multiple places as they traverse the high seas, stopping in many countries.</p>
<p>A single ship might be connected to dozens of companies. It can be built by one company, owned by a group of other companies, and operated by a group of yet more companies. It may carry cargo for many hundreds of businesses destined for many ports run by different companies, be crewed by an outsourced staffing firm, and insured by another company. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://unctad.org/en/Pages/DIAE/World%20Investment%20Report/World_Investment_Report.aspx">United Nations Conference on Trade and Development</a> expects trade to continue to grow in the coming decades. The <a href="http://www.imo.org/en/Pages/Default.aspx">International Maritime Organization</a>, the international body that regulates shipping, predicts that as trade grows, carbon dioxide emissions from international shipping could <a href="https://www.wired.com/story/container-ships-use-super-dirty-fuel-that-needs-to-change/">increase by as much as 250 percent by 2050</a>. </p>
<p>To date, that organization has done little to address climate change even though it did <a href="http://www.imo.org/en/mediacentre/pressbriefings/pages/06ghginitialstrategy.aspx">announce in April 2018</a> that it aims to halve emissions from shipping by 2050 rather than letting them soar unchecked. <a href="https://www.maersk.com/EN-US/integrated?gclid=EAIaIQobChMI3cuZ3LSb3wIVh56zCh3huAGeEAAYASAAEgJMAPD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds">Maersk</a>, the world’s largest shipping company, <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/05/business/maersk-carbon-emissions-shipping/index.html">announced several months later</a> that it aims to reduce its emissions to zero by 2050.</p>
<p>This is great news, but neither the IMO nor Maersk have provided any detailed information about how these goals will be achieved. Both support more research into fuel-efficient technologies for shipping, but the <a href="http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Environment/PollutionPrevention/AirPollution/Documents/Third%20Greenhouse%20Gas%20Study/GHG3%20Executive%20Summary%20and%20Report.pdf#page=35">IMO itself admits that this is not going to be enough</a>.</p>
<p>So far, no country has taken ownership of any emissions from international shipping. Only emissions from domestic shipping, such as <a href="http://americanhistory.si.edu/onthewater/exhibition/4_2.html">cargo hauled across Lake Michigan</a>, are counted.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/are-electric-vessels-the-wave-of-the-future-in-shipping/a-43046309">first electric vessels</a> are only now beginning to be made. These ships would most likely have much smaller carbon footprints than those in use today, but they can now only <a href="https://electrek.co/2017/12/04/all-electric-cargo-ship-battery-china/">travel short distances</a> before having to charge their batteries again. The <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/are-electric-vessels-the-wave-of-the-future-in-shipping/a-43046309">technology does not yet exist</a> for long maritime voyages for large vessels. </p>
<h2>Not mine</h2>
<p>There are several ways that emissions from international shipping could be allocated to specific countries. In 1996, the countries that had ratified the United Nations <a href="https://unfccc.int/process/the-convention/what-is-the-convention/status-of-ratification-of-the-convention">Framework Convention on Climate Change</a> – the first global treaty on climate change – identified <a href="http://unfccc.int/cop3/resource/docs/1996/sbsta/09a01.htm">eight options</a> to get this done. Over two decades later, there has been no progress with any of them. </p>
<p>The eight options include allocating carbon dioxide emissions to countries based on <a href="https://www.morethanshipping.com/what-is-bunker-or-baf/">where the fuel</a> ships use is sold, where ships are registered, or the origins or destinations of the ships. Each option would lead to radically different emissions responsibilities for individual countries, making it even harder for everyone to reach consensus.</p>
<p>We believe that a critical first step no matter what approach prevails would be to create a comprehensive and open database of international shipping routes and maritime emissions. That would establish a shared baseline for quantifying and allocating carbon dioxide emissions to countries.</p>
<p>Given all that is <a href="https://theconversation.com/climate-change-1-5-c-is-worth-striving-for-but-is-it-feasible-104668">at stake in a warming world</a>, it is high time that countries stop ignoring a big chunk of the human produced carbon dioxide entering the atmosphere. To avoid dangerous climatic changes, it must be all hands on deck.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/108731/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Carbon emissions from maritime freight are everyone’s problem because of climate change.Henrik Selin, Associate Professor in the Frederick S Pardee School of Global Studies, Boston UniversityRebecca Cowing, GDP Center Administrator, Boston UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1080502018-12-06T04:56:38Z2018-12-06T04:56:38ZGeorge Bush Sr could have got in on the ground floor of climate action – history would have thanked him<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/249183/original/file-20181206-128187-rgqc6v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=915%2C1094%2C4175%2C2258&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">George HW Bush during his successful 1988 election campaign.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Wikimedia Commons</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Among the <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-12-01/george-h-w-bush-s-death-spurs-tributes-from-clintons-to-trump">tributes</a>, <a href="https://theintercept.com/2018/12/01/the-ignored-legacy-of-george-h-w-bush-war-crimes-racism-and-obstruction-of-justice/">critiques</a> and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/02/george-hw-bush-family#img-1">personal reminsces</a> on the life of former US president George H.W. Bush, there has been plenty of reflection on his war record – but less on how he handled himself during the early skirmishes of the climate battle.</p>
<p>Scientists had been <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/1981/08/22/us/study-finds-warming-trend-that-could-raise-sea-levels.html">warning of potential problems</a> from the buildup of greenhouse gases for a decade before Bush took office. The warnings culminated in 1988, when NASA climatologist James Hansen, after testifying to a Senate panel, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/jun/19/james-hansen-nasa-scientist-climate-change-warning">uttered the famous words</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>It is time to stop waffling so much and say that the evidence is pretty strong that the greenhouse effect is here.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>By then, Bush’s presidential run was gaining steam. After eight years as vice-president to Ronald Reagan, he wanted the top job, and in Michael Dukakis he faced a Democrat opponent with relatively strong environmental credentials.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-well-miss-george-h-w-bush-americas-last-foreign-policy-president-95560">Why we'll miss George H.W. Bush, America's last foreign policy president</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>On August 31, 1988, on the campaign trail, Bush <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/1990/04/21/opinion/some-white-house-effect.html">promised</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Those who think we are powerless to do anything about the ‘greenhouse effect’ are forgetting about the ‘White House effect’. In my first year in office, I will convene a global conference on the environment at the White House. It will include the Soviets, the Chinese… The agenda will be clear. We will talk about global warming.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Bush won the election, and hosted his promised summit <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/1990/04/21/opinion/some-white-house-effect.html">in April 1990</a>. But he fudged his promise for a clear and open discussion of global warming.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.britannica.com/biography/Bert-Bolin">Bert Bolin</a>, the “father of climate science” and founding chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, found himself mysteriously not invited to the summit. Leaked briefing papers showed the Bush administration’s line was that it was “not beneficial to discuss whether there is or is not warming… In the eyes of the public we will lose this debate.”</p>
<h2>Denial and obfuscation</h2>
<p>In May 1989, Al Gore, who had unsuccessfully sought the Democratic presidential nomination the previous year, accused the president of seeking to dodge the climate issue, after it <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/1989/05/09/science/white-house-admits-censoring-testimony.html">emerged</a> that the Bush Administration had censored Hansen’s Congressional testimony, altering his conclusions about global warming data to make them seem less certain.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, climate deniers were becoming increasingly active, including in the Bush White House. A coal industry-sponsored documentary titled <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Greening_of_Planet_Earth#cite_note-Heat-4">The Greening of Planet Earth</a> began circulating, while Bush’s chief of staff John Sununu became a vocal roadblock to climate policy, throwing up bureaucratic obstacles and winning Cabinet battles against those who wanted a stronger policy. Bush himself reportedly had <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/08/nyt-mag-nathaniel-rich-climate-change/566525/">no strong interest in global warming</a> and was largely briefed on it by non-scientists.</p>
<p>Yet the world pressed on with the climate issue, setting the June 1992 <a href="http://www.un.org/geninfo/bp/enviro.html">Rio Earth Summit</a> as the deadline for completing a new United Nations treaty that would formalise the global negotiation process. The US administration said that Bush – up for re-election in November – would refuse to attend if the treaty text included targets and timetables for emissions reductions. Bush’s <a href="http://www.ipsnews.net/2012/05/us-lifestyle-is-not-up-for-negotiation/">words were</a>: “The American way of life is not up for negotiations. Period.” It’s a sentiment we’re still used to hearing from many of today’s politicians.</p>
<p>The major dilemma facing international negotiators was whether to accommodate the United States and have a weak treaty, or push ahead without them. The fate of the <a href="http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/unclos_e.pdf">Convention on the Law of the Sea</a> – which languished for almost a decade without ratification because of US opposition – pushed them towards compromise. It took a British initiative – with UK Environment Secretary Michael Howard flying to the US to convince the Americans they could sign on – before Bush would agree to attend.</p>
<p>An <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1992/10/31/bush-was-aloof-in-warming-debate/f14bea92-884c-401b-9870-5bef72960806/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.b9368e5b329b">October 1992 Washington Post profile</a> paints a picture of a man who was not really engaged in the global warming issue. Based on interviews with more than 20 policy officials and other advisers, Bush was described as being:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>…detached, uninterested, and as his brief remarks in the April meeting showed, responsive only to the politics of a complex issue. He never sat for a full-dress scientific briefing on it or exercised control over administration policy, even after infighting among administration officials became public, or leaders of other industrialised nations pledged action.</p>
</blockquote>
<h2>Historic compromises</h2>
<p>The Rio deal – the <a href="https://unfccc.int/">UN Framework Convention on Climate Change</a> – was quickly signed and ratified by enough countries, including the US, to become international law. The first annual summit was held in Berlin in 1995, and negotiators are <a href="https://theconversation.com/as-they-meet-in-poland-for-the-next-steps-nations-are-struggling-to-agree-on-how-the-ambitions-of-the-paris-agreement-can-be-realised-107712">currently gathered in Katowice, Poland</a>, for the 24th round of talks. Along the way, the negotiations have delivered the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement. </p>
<p>But the key battle, which has never been won, was for the implementation of binding targets and timetables for countries, especially wealthy ones, to cut their emissions. The inherent weakness of Paris Agreement, which does not contain binding targets and is <a href="https://theconversation.com/most-countries-need-to-at-least-double-their-efforts-on-climate-study-49731">not currently on track</a> to meet its stated goals, is the result of compromises made decades ago.</p>
<p>Bush’s son, George W. Bush, had a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2001/mar/29/globalwarming.usnews">far worse record on climate action</a> during his own presidency. But Bush senior was in the White House during the formative years of the international climate effort. He had the chance to be a genuine leader, had he seized it. But when we needed decisive, brave and far-sighted leadership, instead we got the same backing-in of corporate interests, and nearsighted defence of the status quo, that we have grown so used to seeing from political leaders.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/15th-century-chinese-sailors-have-a-lesson-for-trump-about-climate-policy-78752">15th-century Chinese sailors have a lesson for Trump about climate policy</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>There is of course plenty of blame to go around for our species’ failure to address climate change. One of Bush’s oldest friends, who served as secretary of state, James Baker, has tried to get Republicans on board with climate action, including with the recent <a href="http://fortune.com/2018/09/10/baker-shultz-climate-plan/">Baker-Shulz carbon dividend plan</a>. But many high-profile Republicans, the current president included, still wear their climate recalcitrance as a badge of honour.</p>
<p>We are living with the <a href="https://theconversation.com/climate-changes-signature-was-writ-large-on-australias-crazy-summer-of-2017-73854">consequences</a> today. And the children who <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-11-30/australian-students-climate-change-protest-scott-morrison/10571168">went on strike last Friday</a>, fighting a battle they should not have had to join, will live with them for the rest of their lives.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/108050/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Marc Hudson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>George H.W. Bush, who has passed away aged 94, was US president when the world began grasping the climate issue in earnest. But he was pivotal in setting the US on a course of blocking climate action.Marc Hudson, PhD Candidate, Sustainable Consumption Institute, University of ManchesterLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1078702018-12-05T11:41:43Z2018-12-05T11:41:43ZWhy the rise of populist nationalist leaders rewrites global climate talks<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/248933/original/file-20181205-186085-i6bsx4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">International climate negotiators need to recognize the motivations that drive populist nationalist leaders.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Poland-Climate-Change/5df1a9eacc3f4fd7872ea7e13d6c0a3b/2/0">AP Photo/Alik Keplicz</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The election of Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil not only marks the rise of another populist nationalist leader on the world stage. It’s also a turning point for the global politics of climate change.</p>
<p>When the new president takes office in January 2019, by my estimate at least 30 percent of global emissions will be generated from democracies governed by populist nationalist leaders. </p>
<p>As climate policymakers meet at this week’s UN climate conference in Poland (a country itself <a href="https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/10/05/polands-new-populism-pis/">governed by a populist nationalist party</a>) people who care about achieving the Paris Agreement goal should push for and develop new strategies for advancing policies to reduce emissions within countries headed by these leaders. </p>
<h2>Populism and cutting national emissions</h2>
<p>What is populist nationalism? Although both populism and nationalism are contested terms, political scientist Francis Fukuyama, <a href="http://publications.credit-suisse.com/tasks/render/file/index.cfm?fileid=C52BE2DD-03A8-BEE2-C70891AA3AEF9586">offers</a> this tidy synthesis of the characteristics associated with populist nationalists leaders in democracies. </p>
<p>Firstly, these leaders define “the people” narrowly to refer to a single national identity which is oftentimes anti-elitist. Secondly, they promote policies which are popular among their selected people, or base of support, in the short term but may not be in the long-term economic, social or environmental interests of the country. Thirdly, populist nationalists are expert at capitalizing on their supporters’ cultural fears about a loss of status in society. </p>
<p>Over the past five years there have been several populist electoral victories in countries that are among the <a href="http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/headlines/society/20180301STO98928/greenhouse-gas-emissions-by-country-and-sector-infographic">highest emitters of greenhouse gases</a>. This includes the U.S., India, Indonesia, Mexico, Poland and the Philippines. While these regimes each represent a different brand of populist nationalism, they exhibit the basic characteristics I’ve just described.</p>
<p>From my perspective as a scholar focused on global energy and climate policies, it’s clear that the political structure of populist nationalism makes introducing policies to reduce, or mitigate, emissions in democracies difficult. </p>
<p>Mitigation policies require leaders to expend short-term political capital for long-term economic and environmental gains. However, populists have shown a particularly strong disinterest for doing so, particularly if those short-term costs would affect their prioritized group of the people. </p>
<p>Perhaps the clearest example of this is President Donald Trump’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/trump-slams-brakes-on-obamas-climate-plan-but-theres-still-a-long-road-ahead-75252">unwinding of the Clean Power Plan</a>. It may bring short-term benefits to his base, which includes coal miners and related interests, but it is not aligned with long-term <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00963402.2017.1388673">energy market trends in the U.S.</a> toward natural gas, wind and solar for generating electricity and away from coal. </p>
<h2>Resistant to global pressure</h2>
<p>Secondly, as several <a href="https://books.google.com.au/books?id=iv22AgAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false">country-level case studies</a> have shown, developing policies to reduce national emissions is often a top-down and elite-driven activity. This is particularly true in high-emitting middle-income democracies like Mexico or Indonesia. In these countries, mitigation policies, like carbon taxes, have not emerged by way of large scale social movements but by top-down policy processes supported by international donors and nongovernment actors. In these countries, climate mitigation is at risk of being overridden by policies with more popular appeal. </p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/248928/original/file-20181205-100853-ro8fok.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/248928/original/file-20181205-100853-ro8fok.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/248928/original/file-20181205-100853-ro8fok.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=931&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/248928/original/file-20181205-100853-ro8fok.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=931&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/248928/original/file-20181205-100853-ro8fok.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=931&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/248928/original/file-20181205-100853-ro8fok.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1170&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/248928/original/file-20181205-100853-ro8fok.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1170&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/248928/original/file-20181205-100853-ro8fok.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1170&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Indonesia President Joko Widodo, also known as Jokowi, has prioritized economic expansion over spending international funds to stem deforestation.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/ukik/14967050094/in/photolist-oNA3xQ-SeAeLG-FZvE29-pX9MzH-q5TyYB-pY6TbN-psTYfC-d4Rhi3-gNL2xb-ozkz54-hZr4HY-o9bij4-ma4un6-nfa4cz-nzus4t-q9VzuL-pJPnyU-SezMFL-RwUTzm-C816rh-G9D2Sc-HEU3V7-SeAgn7-AvnuXt-HaiRGL-FujS4j-Fz9B9Q-H4iP3j-zFTuHj-H8fTmG-Ni36u9-SzF49S-SPoUVt-SezR6S-SezU7m-RwUzWq-SKNdKf-SzF4b5-SezS1s-RwUTfJ-SeAdHE-ND62YV-AE6QeX-UtojwD-wRJd7F-wRybDm-xNAoKn-xKCP7o-xuZR37-pE9Wnw">ahmad syauki</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In a forthcoming paper on Mexico, a colleague and I investigate incoming President Andrés Manuel López Obrador’s (AMLO’s) mitigation policy. The AMLO administration has <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wtqDgsYrhY6wIxVo3nRz4ou7qK1JPEOj/view">publicly committed</a> to reduce emissions through a little-known set of carbon pricing policies, while at the same time responding to a popular demand to reduce fuel prices by <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mexico-oil/mexicos-lopez-obrador-pledges-more-than-11-billion-for-refineries-idUSKBN1KY2C1">increasing domestic oil refining</a>. In the contest between the top-down mitigation policy and the widespread popular demands for low gasoline prices, it is likely that the latter will take priority. </p>
<p>A third issue relates to the international governance of climate mitigation. Under the Paris Agreement, governments are asked to progressively ratchet up their emission reduction goals. This mechanism assumes political leaders will respond to international pressure to increase their ambition. However, populist nationalists have shown that they are not motivated by international reactions to their climate policies. </p>
<p>Take Indonesian President Joko Widodo, for instance, who was elected into office in 2014. As <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3293394">I have described</a> elsewhere, one of his first moves in office was to shut down a US$1 billion mitigation policy <a href="https://e360.yale.edu/features/despite-government-pledges-ravaging-of-indonesias-forests-continues">program funded by the Norwegian government</a>. This decision to close the agency breached the bilateral agreement between Indonesia and Norway, and points to the disregard shown by some of these leaders to international political pressure.</p>
<p>As these short anecdotes suggest, the mechanism by which populist nationalists hold and retain political power makes it difficult to introduce climate mitigation policies. Their interest is to prioritize short-term programs which favor their select group of the people, rather than longer-term mitigating policies which have widespread economic and environmental benefits. Also, because they don’t comply with traditional norms of international relations, it will not be possible to coerce this group into meeting the Paris Agreement goals. </p>
<p>However, there are some ways countries that want to make reach consensus on global climate policies can better engage these leaders.</p>
<h2>Ways to engage</h2>
<p>As a starting point, it is important to emphasize the short-term benefits of climate mitigation policy to populists. </p>
<p>I believe policymakers and advocates would be well-served in drawing attention to how clean energy may bring multiple short-term benefits to the people on whose support these leaders rely, including lowering domestic air pollution, low cost energy, improved health outcomes and less reliance on foreign fuel imports. Indeed on some of these points, Bolsonaro, has recently <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/brazil-election/brazils-bolsonaro-plans-hydro-nuclear-plants-to-tackle-power-shortfall-general-idUSL2N1WR0OG">said</a> that he will increase the country’s hydropower and nuclear capacity. </p>
<p>Further, <a href="https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/political-not-economic-roots-of-populism-by-andres-velasco-2018-11?a_la=english&a_d=5c01641a78b6c73e94422a8d&a_m=&a_a=click&a_s=&a_p=%2Fcommentary%2Feconomy-value-private-public-investment-by-mariana-mazzucato-2018-09&a_li=political-not-economic-roots-of-populism-by-andres-velasco-2018-11&a_pa=featured&a_ps=">recent research</a> suggests the cultural dimension of populist nationalism is of central importance. Rather than reducing emissions and tackling global climate change, it may be better to frame mitigation as part of a large-scale effort towards modernization; that is, modernizing energy systems, transportation systems and infrastructure. A narrative built around modernization, highlighting the economic and societal benefits for all, may resonate more with the disaffected middle classes who have led the rise of populist nationalism.</p>
<p>At the international level too there may be some approaches to ensuring the international governance regime continues in the face of this current wave of populist nationalism. As scholars <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/research/undiplomatic-action-a-practical-guide-to-the-new-politics-and-geopolitics-of-climate-change/">David Victor and Bruce Jones</a> have recently argued, it may be useful to form small groups – or clubs – of countries which share similar interests to focus on clean technology and policy innovation. Focusing on shared interests within small clubs may work better than trying to push populist nationalists to comply with broad international agreements.</p>
<p>Populist nationalist leaders, like Bolsonaro, are the consequence of deeply entrenched economic, political and cultural shifts that have occurred in democracies over decades. These leaders, in other words, are likely to be a feature of democratic politics for some time into the future. </p>
<p>To continue to make progress on global climate agreements, I think it’s crucial that negotiating countries meet national populist leaders on their own terms for ongoing attempts to save the climate.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/107870/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Arjuna Dibley does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Thirty percent of global emissions will be generated from democracies governed by populist nationalist leaders who have very different playbooks than more traditional politicians.Arjuna Dibley, Graduate Fellow, Steyer-Taylor Center for Energy Policy and Finance, Stanford UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1079312018-12-04T11:32:22Z2018-12-04T11:32:22ZWhy the next two years are critical for the Paris climate deal’s survival<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/248302/original/file-20181202-194932-17bpbrc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Work cut out for them: Climate negotiators need to ensure the Paris Agreement can still hold.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/unfccc/46094249742/in/dateposted/">United Nations Climate Change</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>A mounting sense of urgency will greet negotiators as they arrive at this year’s <a href="http://cop24.gov.pl/">United Nations Climate Change Conference</a> in Poland. In 2015, after 20 years of trying and failing to reach a global accord on climate-changing emissions, 195 nations hammered out a deal, the <a href="https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/what-is-the-paris-agreement">Paris Agreement</a>, that all of them could accept. </p>
<p>Three years on, it’s becoming increasingly clear that national decisions about climate action, which country negotiators will convey in Poland and over the next two years, will determine whether the breakthrough Paris pact succeeds both on a political and emissions reduction front.</p>
<p>As scholars at the <a href="https://globalchange.mit.edu/">MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change</a>, we have closely followed the global climate change agreements and studied their implications. Based on our <a href="https://globalchange.mit.edu/publications/signature/2018-food-water-energy-climate-outlook">analysis</a> of nations’ commitments to cut emissions, getting the world on track to achieve the agreement’s signature goal – to keep global warming below two degrees Celsius – will require far more ambitious climate action than what countries have pledged so far. This action must begin sooner rather than later to avoid the worst <a href="https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/">consequences of climate change</a>, from severe droughts to extreme flooding.</p>
<h2>Climate change won’t wait for humanity’s response</h2>
<p>Climate change is the type of problem where delay is especially costly. It is not like other pollution such as dirty urban air or a putrid stream. For these, people might clean up a polluted area this year, but if they put off the task, there will probably still be the same opportunity to get it done the following year. </p>
<p>Not so with <a href="https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/greenhouse-gases">greenhouse gases</a>, which hang around for decades to centuries. So if societies delay revising our current practices – burning fossil fuels, chopping down forests, planting <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/rice-farming-climate-change-global-warming-india-nitrous-oxide-methane-a8531401.html">more polluting crops like rice</a>, as well as <a href="https://theconversation.com/yes-eating-meat-affects-the-environment-but-cows-are-not-killing-the-climate-94968">raising cows</a> – the total amount in the atmosphere will grow. The goals for limiting global warming will get steadily more difficult to achieve.</p>
<p>In addition, as the nations’ representatives gather in Poland to pursue their effort to gain control of this process, a crucial decision point is rapidly approaching.</p>
<h2>Brutal timing</h2>
<p>In the Paris Agreement, each nation is to make a pledge (what the agreement calls a <a href="https://unfccc.int/process/the-paris-agreement/nationally-determined-contributions/ndc-registry">Nationally Determined Contribution</a>) to achieve a level of emissions control by a target date. For most countries this is the year 2030. They will also submit to a review of whether they did what they said they would do every two years. </p>
<p>Our <a href="https://globalchange.mit.edu/publications/signature/2018-food-water-energy-climate-outlook">analysis</a> shows that, fortunately, meeting these Paris pledges will halt emissions growth at least to 2030, though without additional action growth will resume thereafter. This voluntary system of pledge and review represents real progress on this difficult issue. Experts in international affairs <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=luFBfBi9D0k">argue that it is perhaps the best deal possible</a> for a 195-nation agreement.</p>
<p><iframe id="IUALf" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/IUALf/7/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>The pledges for 2030 are just the first step, however. Getting the globe onto a path to the 2°C Paris goal, much less to meet its <a href="http://www.ipcc.ch/report/sr15/">stretch objective</a> of 1.5°C, will require stronger action beyond 2030.</p>
<p>How tough the emissions restrictions must be in the next decade or two depends on the pace of reduction that may be feasible later in the century – and here emerging technology could possibly play a role. For example, a significant effort is underway to develop techniques to suck carbon dioxide (CO2) out of the air and <a href="https://www.nap.edu/resource/25259/Negative%20Emissions%20Technologies.pdf">store it underground</a>. If we could count on this option becoming available and affordable in the future, participating nations in the Paris Agreement could relax their emissions controls a bit now and the temperature goal could potentially still be met. </p>
<p>We take the view, however, that it is not wise to <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-we-cant-reverse-climate-change-with-negative-emissions-technologies-103504">bet the planet on the chance of a late-century technical fix</a>. To avoid this risky bet, our analysis shows that meeting the Paris 2°C goal requires a dramatic turnaround in emissions in the very near future. </p>
<h2>Why 2020 is a crucial date</h2>
<p>The Paris Agreement sets up a five-year cycle of updates and specifies that in 2020 nations should revise their pledges for 2030, increasing ambition if possible. Also in 2020, nations are to pledge emissions reductions to be made by the next target date, likely to be 2035. </p>
<p>Whether there is <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-biggest-sticking-point-in-paris-climate-talks-money-49193">financial aid for less-wealthy countries</a> could have a big effect on the outcome. For 2030, and likely for future target dates, the pledges of many developing nations assume aid will be provided to help with the task. The richer countries have agreed to provide it, but the flow of funds thus far has been <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/09/world/asia/green-climate-fund-global-warming.html">small in relation to the need</a>. </p>
<p>This assistance will be increasingly important in the future because a growing share of global emissions will come from rapidly growing developing countries. We <a href="https://globalchange.mit.edu/publications/signature/2018-food-water-energy-climate-outlook">project</a> these countries to represent over three-quarters of global emissions by 2030, and to continue to grow after that.</p>
<p>Failure to achieve substantial increases in ambition in these 2020 declarations, and the financial assistance to support them, would be bad news for the climate. Delay in starting the turn-down of emissions suggested in our analysis will further add to the collection of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. As their concentration grows, the path of reduction leading to a 2°C outcome will become steeper, and thus more costly, potentially putting temperature goals out of reach. </p>
<p>All this means that a wimpy response by participating nations in 2020 will threaten the credibility of the hard-won Paris Agreement. The willingness of nations to participate in such a volunteer control effort depends on confidence in the fairness and effectiveness of the global effort. Are others doing their part? Is the overall regime working? If countries don’t meet their Paris Agreement commitments to cut emissions and then, further, don’t ratchet up their ambitions, the entire agreement risks unraveling.</p>
<h2>Time pressure</h2>
<p>The current absence of the U.S. in global climate talks doesn’t help, but fortunately most other nations recognize the global risk and are <a href="https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/year-trump-backed-climate-agreement-countries-work-fill/story?id=55565087">making a serious effort</a> to ensure that the agreement succeeds. </p>
<p>And all negotiators recognize that substantial new pledges in 2020 will help build confidence in the effort, besides encouraging everybody to make sure they meet their 2030 goals. There is great time pressure between now and 2020, given all that needs to be done. But this is nonetheless a time of great opportunity. Negotiated deals and national decisions made in these few months may determine whether or not the world’s nations will get on track to meeting this global challenge.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/107931/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Henry D. Jacoby has in the past received funding from the MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, whose supporters are listed in htttp://glboalchange.mit.edu.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jennifer Morris works for the MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, which receives funding from an international consortium of government, industry and foundation sponsors: <a href="https://globalchange.mit.edu/sponsors/current">https://globalchange.mit.edu/sponsors/current</a></span></em></p>The Paris Agreement was a breakthrough in global climate talks, but nations now face major hurdles to meeting long-term emissions goals – and maintaining global support for the deal.Henry D. Jacoby, Professor of Management (Emeritus) and Joint Program the Science and Policy of Global Change, MIT Sloan School of ManagementJennifer Morris, Research Scientist, Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/947972018-04-12T10:54:03Z2018-04-12T10:54:03ZThe urgency of curbing pollution from ships, explained<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/214328/original/file-20180411-584-cm110e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A cargo ship passes the Golden Gate Bridge outside San Francisco.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Ocean-Emissions/45a647327e58463481ac1d356999aff3/54/0">AP Photo/Jeff Chiu</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The <a href="http://www.imo.org/en/About/Pages/Default.aspx">International Maritime Organization</a>, a United Nations agency that regulates global shipping, is <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-04100-9">writing new rules</a> to curb greenhouse gas emissions from ships by 2050 as it implements other regulations that will mandate <a href="http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/environment/pollutionprevention/airpollution/pages/sulphur-oxides-(sox)-%E2%80%93-regulation-14.aspx">cleaner-burning fuels at sea by 2020</a>. </p>
<p><a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=74F-n3sAAAAJ&hl=en">As researchers</a> who <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=nFDXRBkAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">study the shipping industry</a>, we have determined that the benefits of greener shipping outweigh the costs. Yet <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/24590915?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents">global environmental rule-making, implementation and enforcement</a> take a long time, creating delays that can endanger public health and the environment. </p>
<h2>Heavy fuel oil</h2>
<p>The more than <a href="https://www.statista.com/statistics/264024/number-of-merchant-ships-worldwide-by-type/">52,000 ships</a> crisscrossing ocean trade routes will burn more than <a href="http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Environment/PollutionPrevention/AirPollution/Documents/Third%20Greenhouse%20Gas%20Study/GHG3%20Executive%20Summary%20and%20Report.pdf">2 billion barrels of heavy fuel oil</a>
this year. Heavy fuel oil, a crude oil byproduct, contains sulfur concentrations up to 1,800 times higher than the diesel fuel burned on <a href="https://www.epa.gov/diesel-fuel-standards/diesel-fuel-standards-and-rulemakings">U.S. highways</a>. </p>
<p>Ships <a href="http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Environment/PollutionPrevention/AirPollution/Documents/Third%20Greenhouse%20Gas%20Study/GHG3%20Executive%20Summary%20and%20Report.pdf">contribute between 2 and 3 percent</a> of the world’s total greenhouse gas emissions, studies show. Unless the world takes action to control noxious air pollutants and reduce greenhouse gases, harmful pollution will grow in tandem with <a href="http://www.futurenautics.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/GlobalMarineTrends2030Report.pdf">global trade</a> in the coming decades.</p>
<p>Atmospheric processes transform ship exhaust into toxic particles, which drift far from shipping routes. Originating along shipping routes, these pollutants endanger human health and acidify lakes and streams hundreds of miles inland.</p>
<h2>Public health hazard</h2>
<p>As part of an international team of scholars, we researched how sulfur-related pollution from ships affects human health. Our team found that ship pollution causes about <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-017-02774-9">400,000 premature deaths</a> from lung cancer and cardiovascular disease, and 14 million cases of childhood asthma each year.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/214204/original/file-20180411-592-z2pl9d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/214204/original/file-20180411-592-z2pl9d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/214204/original/file-20180411-592-z2pl9d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=300&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/214204/original/file-20180411-592-z2pl9d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=300&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/214204/original/file-20180411-592-z2pl9d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=300&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/214204/original/file-20180411-592-z2pl9d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=377&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/214204/original/file-20180411-592-z2pl9d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=377&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/214204/original/file-20180411-592-z2pl9d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=377&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Projected premature mortality from lung cancer and cardiovascular disease due to sulfur pollution from ships in 2020 unless emissions are cut.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://doi.org//10.1038/s41467-017-02774-9">Study by James Winebrake, James Corbett and other researchers</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Maritime regulation requires cooperation among many, if not most, of the world’s nations, using their shared authority to verify compliance upon arrival in their ports. But at sea, most shipping companies operate relatively independently of the country where they are headquartered.</p>
<p>The International Maritime Organization sets international shipping policies through consensus agreements that specify compliance requirements and leave enforcement up to national authorities. In 2008, governments and industries agreed to adopt cleaner fuels in 2020. Since then, we estimate that ship air pollution exposure contributed to more than 1.5 million premature deaths and aggravated asthma conditions for over 100 million children.</p>
<p>Given the climate benefits of low-carbon shipping, we believe that the world can’t wait three decades to set and enforce shipping greenhouse gas targets.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/94797/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>James J. Winebrake co-led research partly funded by non-governmental organizations including the ClimateWorks Foundation. He has also received funding from other environmental and industry organizations, regulatory agencies, the U.S. government and the International Maritime Organization.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>James J Corbett co-led research directly related to this article that was partly funded by non-governmental organizations, including the ClimateWorks Foundation. He has also received funding from other environmental and industry organizations, regulatory agencies, the U.S. government and the International Maritime Organization.</span></em></p>The maritime pollution that drifts to dry land, causes an estimated 400,000 premature deaths and 14 million cases of childhood asthma each year.James J. Winebrake, Professor of Public Policy and Dean of the College of Liberal Arts, Rochester Institute of TechnologyJames J Corbett, Professor, University of DelawareLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/894902017-12-31T14:19:01Z2017-12-31T14:19:01ZCabinet papers 1994-95: Keating’s climate policy grapples sound eerily familiar<p>A highly publicised international deal on climate change is two years old. Australia’s federal government, under pressure from environmentalists and with a new prime minister at the helm, signs up and <a href="https://theconversation.com/australia-to-ratify-the-paris-climate-deal-under-a-large-trump-shaped-shadow-68586">quickly ratifies it</a>. However, its emissions reductions actions don’t work, and the government faces a dilemma: strengthen the measures (including perhaps carbon pricing), or keep cooking up voluntary measures, spiced with a <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-federal-climate-policy-review-a-recipe-for-business-as-usual-89372">dash of creative accounting</a>.</p>
<p>While the paragraph above might just as well describe the present day, it also sums up the situation in 1994, when Paul Keating’s government was wrestling with Australia’s climate policy. The period is better remembered for <a href="https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/133332774">angry timber industry workers blockading Parliament</a>, but there were also important battles over carbon pricing and Australia’s international negotiating position.</p>
<p>Cabinet papers from 1994 and 1995, <a href="http://naa.gov.au/collection/explore/cabinet/by-year/index.aspx">released today</a> by the National Archives of Australia, show how Keating’s cabinet fought an internal civil war over how to respond to climate change, while working hard to protect Australia’s fossil fuel exports.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/its-30-years-since-scientists-first-warned-of-climate-threats-to-australia-88314">It's 30 years since scientists first warned of climate threats to Australia</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>International pressure building</h2>
<p>Two years previously, in 1992, Australia’s environment minister Ros Kelly had <a href="https://theconversation.com/twenty-five-years-of-australian-climate-pledges-trumped-78651">enthusiastically signed up</a> to the new <a href="https://unfccc.int/files/essential_background/background_publications_htmlpdf/application/pdf/conveng.pdf">United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)</a> at the Rio Earth Summit. Australia’s willingness to support targets and timetables for emissions reductions (something the United States ultimately vetoed) gave it credibility. </p>
<p>Australia used this credibility to propound a “fossil fuel clause,” which made the now-familiar argument that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>…economies that are highly dependent on income generated from the production, processing and export, and/or consumption of fossil fuels and associated energy-intensive products and/or the use of fossil fuels … have serious difficulties in switching to alternatives.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The cabinet papers released today reveal that defending this clause was a major preoccupation of the government of the day.</p>
<p>In early 1994 Ros Kelly’s political career was brought low by the <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/close-keating-ally-resigns-in-grants-scandal-1426241.html">“sports rorts” affair</a>. She was briefly replaced by Graham Richardson, and then the highly respected John Faulkner.</p>
<p>By this time, all climate eyes were on the first UNFCCC summit, to be held in Berlin in March-April 1995. As an August 1994 cabinet memo noted: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>…international pressure is mounting to strengthen the Convention’s emission reduction commitments,</p>
</blockquote>
<p>and</p>
<blockquote>
<p>…Australia’s measures will fall short of reaching greenhouse gas emission targets and that Australia’s greenhouse performance is likely to compare unfavourably with that of most other OECD countries.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This was a reference to the 1992 <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/AUMPLawJl/1997/48.pdf">National Greenhouse Response Strategy</a>, which was already being shown to be toothless, with state governments approving new coal-fired
power stations and renewable energy ignored. Environmentalists wanted more mandatory action; business wanted to keep everything voluntary. After a roundtable hosted by Keating in June, cabinet debated climate change in August.</p>
<p>The political calculations involved are evident in the official record, which states: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>[Australia’s] ability to influence international negotiations away from unqualified, binding uniform emissions commitments towards approaches that better reflect Australia’s interests will be inhibited by a relatively poor domestic greenhouse response.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>And what are Australia’s national interests? It won’t surprise you to learn that the government worried that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>…action by the international community could have a major impact on Australia’s energy sector and on the economy in general, by changing the nature and pattern of domestic energy use and/or by changing the world market for energy for Australian exporters.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Cabinet pondered finding international allies – such as Sweden, the Netherlands, Denmark, Switzerland and New Zealand – for the get-out-of-jail idea of “burden sharing”, which would allow countries to finesse their climate commitments by funding emissions reductions elsewhere.</p>
<p>Cabinet also canvassed the possibility of adopting either a proactive or reactive stance, or even withdrawing from the UN climate negotiations altogether. That last option – one that in essence would be adopted by John Howard, at least after George Bush opened up that space in 2001 by withdrawing from Kyoto – was seen as too risky. While the UNFCCC didn’t contain provisions for banning imports from recalcitrant countries, nevertheless:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>As a major exporter of energy and energy intensive products, Australia would need to be involved in the negotiations to guard against the possibility of this occurring.</p>
</blockquote>
<h2>Carbon tax?</h2>
<p>Faulkner had already flagged that he would bring a proposal to December 1994’s cabinet meeting, possibly including a small carbon tax – something the Greens, Democrats and Australian Conservation Foundation were <a href="https://theconversation.com/tax-or-trade-the-war-on-carbon-pricing-has-been-raging-for-decades-46008">all pushing for</a>.</p>
<p>His opponents were ready, with a two-pronged approach. First, they produced economic modelling (with, it later emerged, <a href="http://www.ombudsman.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0024/26286/investigation_1998_01.pdf">significant help from fossil fuel companies</a>), which warned that “to stabilise emissions at 1988 levels by 2000, taxes per tonne of CO₂ would need to be around US$192 for Australia and US$24 for the OECD.</p>
<p>So far, so frightening. But given that decisions reached at the Berlin summit might have consequences for Australia’s prized coal exports, some sort of
response was necessary. Fortunately, the Department of Primary Industry and Energy had prepared a document, called Response to Greenhouse Challenge "in consultation with key industry organisations” such as the Business Council of Australia. This had provided a “basis for discussions with industry and incorporates the key principles that industry wants included in the scheme”.</p>
<p>The carbon tax decision was deferred, and ultimately after a series of meetings in February 1995, Faulkner was forced to concede defeat. A purely voluntary scheme – the “Greenhouse Challenge” – was agreed, with industry signing on to what was essentially a reboot of the demonstrably ineffective National Greenhouse Response Strategy.</p>
<p>The Berlin meeting did lead to a call for <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/09644019508414218">binding emissions cuts for developed countries</a>, and
Australia signed on, albeit grudgingly. By the end of the year, the same industry-funded modelling was used to produce a <a href="https://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/2351285">glossy report</a> which argued that Australia deserved special consideration because of the makeup of its economy. Australian diplomats would use this argument as a basis of their lobbying all the way through to the 1997 Kyoto climate summit.</p>
<p>In one of history’s ironies, on the same day that this report was released – December 1, 1995 – Keating’s cabinet discussed “the development of a more comprehensive effort in greenhouse science”, noting that: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Climate change is capable of impacting severely on coastal infrastructure, living marine resources and coastal ecosystems such as reefs. The Australian
regional oceans strongly influence global climate, and Australia is vulnerable to oceanic changes affecting rainfall and possibly the incidence of tropical cyclones.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>A look at <a href="https://theconversation.com/2017-the-year-in-extreme-weather-88765">2017’s weather</a> tells you they may have been onto something there.</p>
<p><em><strong>Read more</strong>: <a href="https://theconversation.com/its-ten-years-since-rudds-great-moral-challenge-and-we-have-failed-it-75534">It’s ten years since Kevin Rudd’s ‘great moral challenge’, and we have failed it</a></em></p>
<hr>
<h2>The ominous parallels</h2>
<p>As I pointed out in <a href="https://theconversation.com/cabinet-papers-1992-93-australia-reluctant-while-world-moves-towards-first-climate-treaty-70535">last year’s cabinet records article</a>, “when it comes to climate policy, there are no real secrets worthy of the name. We have always known that the Australian state quickly retreated from its already hedged promise to take action, and told us all along that this was because we had a lot of coal”.</p>
<p>Reading these documents is a bit like yelling at a person in a horror movie not to open the door behind which the killer lurks. You know it is futile, but you just can’t help yourself. The December 1994 cabinet minutes contain sentences like this:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Greenhouse is expected to generate future commercial opportunities for Australia with increased export of renewable energy technology e.g. photovoltaic, wind and mini-hydro technology, especially in the Asia-Pacific Region [to] support renewables.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>At yet, several governments later, we’re stuck having the same debates while standing by and letting other countries embrace those exact opportunities.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/89490/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Marc Hudson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Paul Keating’s government, faced with the prospect of international action on climate change, took steps to preserve the coal industry - a tactic that has been rebooted many times since.Marc Hudson, PhD Candidate, Sustainable Consumption Institute, University of ManchesterLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/861842017-11-03T02:57:07Z2017-11-03T02:57:07ZBonn voyage: climate diplomats head into another round of talks<p>Here we go again. For longer than some of us can remember and the rest of us care to, there have been annual climate change international conferences. From Geneva to Rio, via Kyoto and Copenhagen, the <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-paris-climate-agreement-at-a-glance-50465">“breakthrough” in Paris</a> and the <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-view-from-marrakech-climate-talks-are-battling-through-a-trump-tsunami-68597">Trump tsunami in Marrakech</a>, the world’s climate diplomats now head to Bonn, where Monday marks the start of another <a href="http://newsroom.unfccc.int/cop-23-bonn/">fortnight-long summit</a>.</p>
<p>Things tend to follow a fairly predictable playbook. In the weeks leading up to the summit, investigative journalists <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/nov/01/fossil-fuel-companies-undermining-paris-agreement-negotiations-report">probe the vested fossil fuel interests</a>. <a href="https://www.boell.de/en/2017/11/01/fiji-un-climate-change-conference-2017-cop23-what-stake-bonn">Think tanks publish predictions</a> based on equal parts wishful thinking, cynicism and reading of chickens’ gizzards. They launch <a href="http://unbonn.org/UNFCCC_ClimateActionLeadershipNetwork">new networks</a> whose names are sprinkled with words like “leadership”, “equity”, “justice” and “ambition”.</p>
<p>Then it all kicks off. The delegates fly in; <a href="https://theconversation.com/citizens-arrests-and-7-metre-dinosaurs-the-history-of-un-climate-summit-protests-50127">the protesters</a> usually travel by less carbon-intensive means. The media descend, looking for tragedy, farce and soundbites, and find all three. </p>
<p>The academics provide <a href="https://theconversation.com/five-things-you-need-to-know-about-the-paris-climate-deal-52256">instant punditry</a>, and Big Green groups try to outdo one another to come up with the best zinger in the aftermath. The all-time leader on that score is surely Greenpeace UK’s John Sauven who remarked after the disastrous 2009 Copenhagen meeting that the city was a “<a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/copenhagen-climate-change-confe/6845892/Copenhagen-summit-ends-in-blood-sweat-and-recrimination.html">crime scene, with the guilty men and women fleeing to the airport</a>”. Second place must go to eminent climate scientist James Hansen, who described the 2015 Paris accord as “<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/12/james-hansen-climate-change-paris-talks-fraud">a fraud</a>”.</p>
<h2>COP this</h2>
<p>This year’s “Conference of the Parties” (COP) is happening in Bonn, Germany, (where the UN’s less-publicised “in between” climate meetings happen). But it is chaired by Fiji, which is not holding the meeting on its own (threatened) shores because of the logistical difficulty of hosting the tens of thousands of delegates.</p>
<p>Earlier this year Australia <a href="http://ministers.dfat.gov.au/fierravanti-wells/releases/Pages/2017/cf_mr_170518a.aspx">threw in A$6 million</a> to help the Fijians with organisational costs. </p>
<p>But anyone who follows climate diplomacy knows that Australia has a chequered record at COP meetings, and hasn’t always been so generous when it comes to the negotiations themselves. So how has Australia fared at previous summits, and what’s on the table this time?</p>
<h2>Climate history</h2>
<p>The starting gun for the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was the November 1990 Second World Climate Conference. Australia initially pledged an ambitious greenhouse gas target of a <a href="https://theconversation.com/25-years-ago-the-australian-government-promised-deep-emissions-cuts-and-yet-here-we-still-are-46805">20% reduction by 2005</a>. But by the time of the Rio Earth Summit two years later, the fossil fuel lobby had been so successful that the Australian fossil fuel lobby’s two top people didn’t bother to go, and neither did the new Prime Minister Paul Keating. Australia signed a weaker target. </p>
<p>By the time the first formal COP took place in 1995, Australian negotiators, at the behest of the Business Council of Australia and others, lobbied for special exemptions as a large, growing country with big coal exports. In the end, Australia grudgingly signed the <a href="http://www.encyclopedia.com/environment/energy-government-and-defense-magazines/berlin-mandate">Berlin Mandate</a>, which called on developed countries to negotiate emissions reductions by the end of 1997. Perhaps Keating, facing an impending election, wasn’t willing to alienate green voters completely.</p>
<p>John Howard’s government had no such concerns. At its first COP, UK politician John Gummer accused Australia of <a href="https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg15120400-100/">putting coal exports to Japan ahead of Australia’s next generation</a>, angrily <a href="https://academic.oup.com/spp/article/25/3/142/1630882">saying</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>They’ve given way to vested interest. They’ve given way to power. They’ve given way to people who have pretended, given way to people who fiddled the science.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Ahead of the 1997 Kyoto summit, Howard promised a mandatory renewable energy target (which finally came into existence four years later). At Kyoto, Australia got a very generous deal - an emissions “reduction” target that allowed emissions to actually rise by 8%, and a clause allowing <a href="https://theconversation.com/australia-hit-its-kyoto-target-but-it-was-more-a-three-inch-putt-than-a-hole-in-one-44731">land-clearing reductions to be counted towards the total</a>. </p>
<p>But even that wasn’t enough to keep Australia in the tent. After US President George W. Bush <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2001/mar/29/globalwarming.usnews">pulled out of Kyoto</a>, Howard <a href="https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/australia-rejects-kyoto-protocol/169527.article">followed suit</a>. The two countries then set up various “spoiler” organisations, such as the <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10784-009-9102-1">Asia Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate</a>, while industry lobbyists from the <a href="https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=sfcvAAAAQBAJ&pg=PR43&lpg=PR43&dq=aign+australian+delegation+climate&source=bl&ots=jBjgX9bxzG&sig=GVIeoqIby84ewK3sxOs0nIFpCuc&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi6j6vgr4fXAhUOUlAKHXwvArAQ6AEISDAF#v=onepage&q=aign%20australian%20delegation%20climate&f=false">Australian Industry Greenhouse Network</a> (the clue is in the name) were part of Australia’s official delegation.</p>
<p>Kevin Rudd later masterfully used Kyoto ratification as virtue signalling, and <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2007-12-04/bali-summit-applauds-rudd-for-kyoto-move/976302">got a standing ovation</a> at COP 13 in Bali in 2007, though it was his climate minister, Penny Wong, who won plaudits. Rudd invested a great deal of emotional and political capital in Copenhagen two years later, and after leaving the “crime scene” he was, by most accounts, extremely discombobulated. </p>
<p>The UN climate negotiation process – which was undergoing careful repair in the period 2010-12 so as to avoid failure in Paris – was not a priority for Julia Gillard, who had won a pyrrhic victory in introducing carbon pricing. For her, the very words “climate” and “carbon” became toxic, thanks to Tony Abbott and the Murdoch behemoth.</p>
<h2>Business as usual</h2>
<p>Once Tony Abbott took over, “normal” service fully resumed. <a href="https://theconversation.com/australia-makes-a-bad-start-at-warsaw-climate-change-meeting-20190">No Australian minister went to COP 19 in Warsaw in 2013</a>, with new environment minister Greg Hunt <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/climate/australia-snubs-global-climate-talks-as-greg-hunt-stays-home-to-repeal-carbon-tax/news-story/9821920aeb3c3ae9257d2499726c4b37">saying he was too busy trying to axe the carbon tax</a>.</p>
<p>The following year, fresh from the government’s <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-11-13/china-us-deal-embarrasses-abbott-government-analyst/5889190">failure to keep climate change off the Brisbane G20 agenda</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/julie-bishop-arrives-at-climate-talks-amid-ignominy-for-australia-35108">Julie Bishop was at COP 20 in Lima</a>, chaperoned - <a href="http://www.afr.com/news/politics/national/julie-bishop-goes-bananas-over-andrew-robb-climate-chaperone-20141203-11zojo">to her reported displeasure</a> - by trade minister Andrew Robb. </p>
<p>The Abbott government was accused of <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/dec/08/abbott-government-accused-of-trying-to-set-up-climate-change-talks-for-failure">attempting to set the Paris talks up for failure</a> by insisting on legally binding emissions targets – something it knew the United States in particular wouldn’t swallow. </p>
<p>Abbott agreed an <a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-2030-climate-target-puts-us-in-the-race-but-at-the-back-45931">unambitious 26-28% reduction target by 2030</a> for Australia (on a 2005 baseline, the same year we should have reduced emissions by 20% from 1988 levels). Of course, by the time the crucial Paris talks arrived, Malcolm Turnbull was Prime Minister.</p>
<p>Australia <a href="https://theconversation.com/australia-to-ratify-the-paris-climate-deal-under-a-large-trump-shaped-shadow-68586">ratified its commitment</a> just as Donald Trump, who has since <a href="https://theconversation.com/time-for-china-and-europe-to-lead-as-trump-dumps-the-paris-climate-deal-78709">committed to pulling the US out</a>, became president. </p>
<p>Meanwhile, at COP 22 in Marrakech, Australia’s lead delegate <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/may/17/fossil-fuel-lobby-to-declare-interests-at-un-talks">defended fossil fuel companies</a>, saying: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Some of the companies being alluded to as the polluters of policy, they will be, some of them, the providers of the biggest and best solutions … you could look at some of the statements coming out of ExxonMobil and Shell recently to underline that point.</p>
</blockquote>
<h2>A Bonn voyage for Australia?</h2>
<p>At the Bonn talks, Australia will cop (sorry) <a href="https://theconversation.com/coal-comfort-pacific-islands-on-collision-course-with-australia-over-emissions-73662">some flak</a> for its lack of reductions ambition, and action.</p>
<p>It will win its usual disproportionate share of those “fossil fool” awards so beloved of activists.</p>
<p>Ministers, chaperoned or not, will bang on about the <a href="http://www.greenclimate.fund/home">Green Climate Fund</a>, which Australia has been <a href="https://foreignminister.gov.au/releases/Pages/2016/jb_mr_161216.aspx">leading in 2017</a>.</p>
<p>Cornered on coal, it may mutter about so-called <a href="https://www.worldcoal.org/reducing-co2-emissions/high-efficiency-low-emission-coal">HELE plants</a>, as per the World Coal Association, or simply try to change the subject (look, a squirrel!).</p>
<p>Mostly, though, Australia’s delegates will hope that the heat is on the Trump Administration, while everyone wrangles over the (lack of) money for “<a href="https://theconversation.com/climate-related-loss-and-damage-is-a-key-issue-but-its-fiendishly-complex-51920">loss and damage</a>” and the finer details of a <a href="https://diva4equality.wordpress.com/2017/09/23/cop23-and-a-unfccc-gender-action-plan-why-it-matters-to-pacific-women/">gender action plan</a>.</p>
<p>Everyone will be thinking ahead to the next COP, to be held in <a href="http://newsroom.unfccc.int/unfccc-newsroom/katowice-announced-as-host-venue-of-un-climate-change-conference-cop-24-in-2018/">Katowice, Poland</a>, where, it is said, some actually “important” decisions will be made. Meanwhile, the carbon dioxide will <a href="https://theconversation.com/world-greenhouse-gas-levels-made-unprecedented-leap-in-2016-86545">carry on accumulating in our skies</a>.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/86184/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
Another round of UN climate negotiations kicks off in Bonn this month. With a Trump-shaped cloud hanging over the Paris Agreement, what approach can we expect Australia to adopt this time around?Marc Hudson, PhD Candidate, Sustainable Consumption Institute, University of ManchesterLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/842032017-09-18T23:35:02Z2017-09-18T23:35:02ZKeeping global warming to 1.5 degrees: really hard, but not impossible<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/186352/original/file-20170918-5120-13sw5go.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The window for staving off the worst of climate change is wider than we thought, but still pretty narrow.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Tatiana Grozetskaya/Shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-paris-climate-agreement-at-a-glance-50465">Paris climate agreement</a> has two aims: “holding the increase in global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C”. The more ambitious of these is not yet out of reach, according to our <a href="http://nature.com/articles/doi:10.1038/ngeo3031">new research</a>.</p>
<p>Despite <a href="https://theconversation.com/we-have-almost-certainly-blown-the-1-5-degree-global-warming-target-63720">previous suggestions that this goal may be a lost cause</a>), our calculations suggest that staying below 1.5°C looks scientifically feasible, if extremely challenging. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/what-is-a-pre-industrial-climate-and-why-does-it-matter-78601">What is a pre-industrial climate and why does it matter?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Climate targets such as the 1.5°C and 2°C goals have been <a href="https://www.pik-potsdam.de/members/cjaeger/publications/2010-2000-1/three%20views.pdf">interpreted in various ways</a>. In practice, however, these targets are probably best seen as <a href="http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199692873.001.0001/acprof-9780199692873-chapter-3">focal points for negotiations</a>, providing a common basis for action. </p>
<p>To develop policies capable of hitting these targets, we need to know the size of the “carbon budget” – the total amount of greenhouse emissions consistent with a particular temperature target. Armed with this knowledge, governments can set policies designed to reduce emissions by the corresponding amount.</p>
<p>In a study <a href="http://nature.com/articles/doi:10.1038/ngeo3031">published in Nature Geoscience</a>, we and our international colleagues present a new estimate of how much carbon budget is left if we want to remain below 1.5°C of global warming relative to <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-is-a-pre-industrial-climate-and-why-does-it-matter-78601">pre-industrial temperatures</a> (bearing in mind that we are <a href="http://nature.com/articles/doi:10.1038/ngeo3036">already at around 0.9°C</a> for the present decade). </p>
<p>We calculate that by limiting total CO₂ emissions from the beginning of 2015 to around 880 billion tonnes of CO₂ (240 billion tonnes of carbon), we would give ourselves a two-in-three chance of holding warming to less than 0.6°C above the present decade. This may sound a lot, but to put it in context, if CO₂ emissions were to continue to increase along current trends, even this new budget would be exhausted in less than 20 years 1.5°C (see <a href="http://www.climateclock.net">Climate Clock</a>). This budget is consistent with the 1.5°C goal, given the warming that humans have already caused, and is substantially greater than the budgets previously inferred from the <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/">5th Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change</a> (IPCC), released in 2013-14. </p>
<p>This does not mean that the IPCC got it wrong. Having predated the Paris Agreement, the IPCC report included very little analysis of the 1.5°C target, which only became a political option during the Paris negotiations themselves. The IPCC did not develop a thorough estimate of carbon budgets consistent with 1.5°C, for the simple reason that nobody had asked them to.</p>
<p>The new study contains a far more comprehensive analysis of the factors that help to determine carbon budgets, such as model-data comparisons, the treatment of non-CO₂ gases, and the issue of the maximum rates at which emissions can feasibly be reduced.</p>
<h2>Tough task</h2>
<p>The emissions reductions required to stay within this budget remain extremely challenging. CO₂ emissions would need to decline by 4-6% per year for several decades. There are precedents for this, but not happy ones: these kinds of declines have historically been seen in events such as the Great Depression, the years following World War II, and during the collapse of the Soviet Union – and even these episodes were relatively brief.</p>
<p>Yet it would be wrong to conclude that greenhouse emissions can only plummet during times of economic collapse and human misery. Really, there is no historical analogy to show how rapidly human societies can rise to this challenge, because there is also no analogy for the matrix of problems (and opportunities) posed by climate change.</p>
<p>There are several optimistic signs that peak emissions may be near. From 2000 to 2013 global emissions climbed sharply, <a href="http://www.lse.ac.uk/GranthamInstitute/publication/chinas-changing-economy/">largely because of China’s rapid development</a>. But <a href="https://theconversation.com/fossil-fuel-emissions-have-stalled-global-carbon-budget-2016-68568">global emissions may now have plateaued</a>, and given the <a href="https://theconversation.com/chinas-smog-kills-more-than-a-million-each-year-but-theres-a-clearer-road-ahead-47600">problems that China encountered with pollution</a> it is unlikely that other nations will attempt to follow the same path. Rapid reduction in the price of solar and wind energy has also led to substantial increases in renewable energy capacity, which also offers hope for future emissions trajectories.</p>
<p>In fact, we do not really know how fast we can decarbonise an economy while improving human lives, because so far we haven’t tried very hard to find out. Politically, climate change is an “<a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/why-cooperate-9780199585212?cc=au&lang=en&">aggregate efforts global public good</a>”, which basically means everyone needs to pull together to be successful. </p>
<p>This is hard. The problem with climate diplomacy (and the reason it took so long to broker a global agreement) is that the incentives for nations to tackle climate change are collectively strong but individually weak.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/paris-climate-targets-arent-enough-but-we-can-close-the-gap-61798">Paris climate targets aren't enough, but we can close the gap</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>This is, unfortunately, the nature of the problem. But our research suggests that a 1.5°C world, <a href="https://theconversation.com/we-have-almost-certainly-blown-the-1-5-degree-global-warming-target-63720">dismissed in some quarters as a pipe dream</a>, remains physically possible. </p>
<p>Whether it is politically possible depends on the interplay between technology, economics, and politics. For the world to achieve its most ambitious climate aspiration, countries need to set <a href="https://theconversation.com/paris-climate-targets-arent-enough-but-we-can-close-the-gap-61798">stronger climate pledges for 2030</a>, and then keep making deep emissions cut for decades. </p>
<p>No one is saying it will be easy. But our calculations suggest that it can be done.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/84203/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dave Frame receives funding from the Deep South National Science Challenge and Victoria University of Wellington.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>H. Damon Matthews receives funding from the Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada.</span></em></p>It’s still possible to hit the more ambitious of the two Paris global warming goals, according to a new estimate of the global carbon budget. But it sure won’t be easy, and we need to start now.Dave Frame, Professor of Climate Change, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of WellingtonH. Damon Matthews, Professor and Concordia University Research Chair in Climate Science and Sustainability, Concordia UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/756762017-04-10T02:19:06Z2017-04-10T02:19:06ZIs Paris climate deal really ‘cactus’, and would it matter if it was?<p>President Donald Trump is keeping some of his promises. Late last month he <a href="https://theconversation.com/trump-tears-down-us-climate-policy-but-america-could-lose-out-as-a-result-75391">signed an executive order</a> that tore up Barack Obama’s Clean Power Plan. Some commentators see this as putting the world on “<a href="http://reneweconomy.com.au/trumps-executive-order-puts-the-world-on-the-road-to-climate-catastrophe-59677">the road to climate catastrophe</a>”, while others have described it as an effort at “<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/03/29/trumps-climate-change-shift-is-really-about-killing-the-international-order/">killing the international order</a>”.</p>
<p>Will America <a href="https://theconversation.com/trump-tears-down-us-climate-policy-but-america-could-lose-out-as-a-result-75391">lose out</a>? Will China, which <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/30/climate-change-china-us-selfish-trump-coal">has chided Trump</a> for selfishness, be the prime beneficiary as its <a href="http://breakingenergy.com/2017/03/29/solar-power-the-future-is-here-alternative-energy/">solar panel industry continues to expand</a>?</p>
<p>Here in Australia, in response to Trump’s order, Liberal backbencher Craig Kelly, chair of the government’s Environment Committee, took predictable aim at Australia’s international climate commitments, labelling the 2015 Paris Agreement “<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/mar/29/conservative-liberals-watching-trumps-lead-on-climate-key-backbencher-says">cactus</a>”. </p>
<p>Kelly is <a href="https://www.facebook.com/CraigKellyMP/posts/123817311146245">on the record as disputing climate science</a> and <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/heat-turned-up-on-malcolm-turnbulls-domestic-climate-policies-as-world-pledges-to-act-20151213-glmbv1.html">poured scorn on the Paris deal when it was struck</a>.
He is certainly not alone among the government’s ranks in this view. </p>
<p>The day after Trump’s election win last November, Australia <a href="https://theconversation.com/australia-to-ratify-the-paris-climate-deal-under-a-large-trump-shaped-shadow-68586">ratified the Paris deal</a>
and Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull said that it would <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/nov/10/turnbull-signals-australia-wont-follow-trumps-lead-on-paris-climate-agreement">take four years for Trump to pull out</a>. </p>
<p>So is the Paris deal really “cactus”? What would we have lost if so? And does it matter?</p>
<h2>What was agreed in Paris?</h2>
<p>The Paris Agreement came after the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (agreed at the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_Summit">Rio Earth Summit</a> in 1992) had suffered a body blow at the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_United_Nations_Climate_Change_Conference">2009 UN climate talks in Copenhagen</a> . </p>
<p>Opinion was divided on the reasons for the failure of the Copenhagen summit, but the then prime minister Kevin Rudd didn’t mince words in blaming the Chinese, infamously accusing them during the negotiations of trying to “<a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-06-15/column-on-kevin-may-contain-coarse-language/866842">rat-fuck us</a>”. (For what it is worth, the British climate writer Mark Lynas <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2009/dec/22/copenhagen-climate-change-mark-lynas">agreed</a>, albeit in less incendiary tones.)</p>
<p>A series of fence-mending meetings and careful smoothing of frayed nerves and wounded egos followed over the next five years. The French took charge and, with the price of renewable energy generation plummeting (and so making emissions reductions at least theoretically “affordable”), a deal was struck at the Paris summit in December 2015.</p>
<p>The agreement, <a href="http://news.trust.org/item/20160407130923-g5wnv/">notably silent on fossil fuels</a>, calls on nations to take actions to reduce their emissions so that temperatures can be held to less than 2°C above the pre-industrial average. This limit, which is <a href="http://www.climateemergencyinstitute.com/uploads/2C_Chris_Shaw_2015.pdf">not actually “safe”</a>,
will require a herculean effort and luck. If you add up all the national commitments, they will most likely take us <a href="http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v534/n7609/full/nature18307.html">to roughly 3°C or beyond</a>.</p>
<p>Australia’s commitment of a 26-28% reduction in greenhouse emissions by 2030, relative to 2005 levels, was seen as being at the <a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-2030-climate-target-puts-us-in-the-race-but-at-the-back-45931">low end of acceptable</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-post-2020-climate-target-not-enough-to-stop-2c-warming-experts-45879">not enough to help meet the 2°C limit</a>.</p>
<p>Eminent climate scientist <a href="http://www.columbia.edu/%7Ejeh1/">James Hansen</a> labelled Paris <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/12/james-hansen-climate-change-paris-talks-fraud">a fraud</a>, while Clive Spash (the economist <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/environment/scientist-quits-csiro-amid-censorship-claims-20091203-k8vb.html">monstered by Labor in 2009</a> for pointing out that Rudd’s Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme was not much cop) thought it was <a href="https://manchesterclimatemonthly.net/2016/04/26/not-manchester-reality-check-on-paris-this-changes-nothing/">worthless</a>.</p>
<p>British climatologist Kevin Anderson is similarly dubious, arguing that the agreement <a href="http://kevinanderson.info/blog/the-hidden-agenda-how-veiled-techno-utopias-shore-up-the-paris-agreement/">assumes we will invent technologies that can suck carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere</a> in, well, industrial quantities in the second half of this century.</p>
<p>So why the relative optimism among the climate commentariat? They’re <a href="https://marchudson.net/2015/12/13/why-the-hype-over-paris-and-cop21-politics-psychology-and-money/">desperate for a win</a> after so many defeats, which stretch back all the way to the Kyoto climate conference of 1997.</p>
<h2>Second time as farce?</h2>
<p>After Australia’s initial promises to be a “<a href="https://theconversation.com/25-years-ago-the-australian-government-promised-deep-emissions-cuts-and-yet-here-we-still-are-46805">good international citizen</a>”, reality quickly <a href="https://theconversation.com/cabinet-papers-1992-93-australia-reluctant-while-world-moves-towards-first-climate-treaty-70535">set in</a> during the early years of serious climate diplomacy. </p>
<p>Although Australia was an early ratifier of the treaty that emerged from the Rio summit, it nevertheless went to the first annual UN climate talks (chaired by a young Angela Merkel) determined to get a good deal for itself, as a country reliant on coal for electricity generation and eyeing big bucks from coal exports. </p>
<p>That meeting resulted in the “<a href="http://www.cfr.org/climate-change/berlin-mandate/p21276">Berlin Mandate</a>”, which called on developed nations to cut emissions first. Australia, gritting its teeth, agreed. Later that year the Keating Government released economic modelling (<a href="http://www.ombudsman.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0024/26286/investigation_1998_01.pdf">paid for in part by fossil fuel interests</a>) which predicted economic Armageddon for Australia if a uniform emissions-reduction target was applied. This work was picked up by the new Howard government. </p>
<p>After much special pleading and swift footwork, Australia got two very sweet deals at Kyoto in 1997. First, its “reduction” target was 108% of 1990 levels within the 2008-12 period (the then environment minister Robert Hill reportedly refused to push for Howard’s preferred 118%). </p>
<p>Second, Australia successfully lobbied for a clause in the Kyoto treaty <a href="https://theconversation.com/australia-hit-its-kyoto-target-but-it-was-more-a-three-inch-putt-than-a-hole-in-one-44731">allowing reductions in land clearing to count as emissions reductions</a>. This meant that Australia could bank benefits for things that were happening for entirely different reasons.</p>
<p>Australia <a href="http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/Browse_by_Topic/ClimateChangeold/governance/international/theKyoto">signed the Kyoto Protocol</a> in April 1998, but in September of the same year the cabinet decided not to ratify the deal unless the United States did. In March 2001 President <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2001/mar/29/globalwarming.usnews">George W. Bush pulled out</a>, and Howard <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/2026446.stm">followed suit on World Environment Day in 2002</a>.</p>
<p>Kyoto ratification then became a <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0962629810000648">symbol of green virtue</a> out of all proportion with its actual impact. Rudd got enormous kudos for ratifying it as his first official act as Prime Minister. And then reality set in again when he tried to actually implement an emissions-reduction policy.</p>
<h2>Why does it matter?</h2>
<p>Reality keeps on impinging. In a <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/31/opinion/a-message-from-the-end-of-the-world.html?_r=0">beautifully written piece</a> in the New York Times, Ariel Dorfman lists disasters befalling Chile (readers in Queensland will feel like they know what he is on about). He concludes:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>As we get ready to return to the United States, our friends and relatives ask, over and over, can it be true? Can President Trump be beset with such suicidal stupidity as to deny climate change and install an enemy of the earth as his environmental czar? Can he be so beholden to the blind greed of the mineral extraction industry, so ignorant of science, so monumentally arrogant, not to realize that he is inviting apocalypse? Can it be, they ask. The answer, alas, is yes.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Will the opinions of politicians like Donald Trump and Craig Kelly matter at all as long as the price of renewables keeps dropping? Well, possibly. “Shots across the bow” of renewables policy have in the past made investors nervous. </p>
<p>As <a href="https://theconversation.com/gas-crisis-energy-crisis-the-real-problem-is-lack-of-long-term-planning-74705">Alan Pears on this website</a>, and <a href="http://reneweconomy.com.au/author/giles/">Giles Parkinson at Reneweconomy</a>
have explained, investors in electricity generation got spooked by the policy uncertainty caused by former prime minister Tony Abbott’s hostility to the Renewable Energy Target. That’s the real (and presumably intended) effect of statements like Kelly’s.</p>
<p>Will it work? Optimists will point to last week’s <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/mar/30/south-australia-to-get-1bn-solar-farm-and-worlds-biggest-battery">announcement that a $1bn solar farm will be built in South Australia</a>, regardless of the concatenating Canberra catastrophe. Perennial pessimists will point to the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keeling_Curve">Keeling Curve</a>, which shows a remorseless and <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/03/13/carbon-dioxide-in-the-atmosphere-is-rising-at-the-fastest-rate-ever-recorded/?utm_term=.7d7e79ee2fac">escalating</a> rise in the level of atmospheric carbon dioxide. Time and prevailing politics are certainly not on our side.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/75676/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
With Donald Trump overturning Obama’s Clean Power Plan, and some Australian politicians cheering him on, will we always have Paris?Marc Hudson, PhD Candidate, Sustainable Consumption Institute, University of ManchesterLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/692112016-11-22T05:23:32Z2016-11-22T05:23:32ZWhy China and Europe should form the world’s most powerful ‘climate bloc’<p>It seems almost certain that US President-elect Donald Trump will walk away from the Paris climate agreement next year. In the absence of US leadership, the question is: who will step up?</p>
<p>Sadly this is not a new question, and history offers some important lessons. In 2001 the world faced a similar dilemma. After former vice-president Al Gore lost the 2000 election to George W. Bush, the newly inaugurated president <a href="http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=45811">walked away from the Kyoto Protocol</a>, the previous global pact to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.</p>
<p>That sent shockwaves around the world, and left nations facing a choice about what to do in the United States’ absence – something they may face again next year. The choice was made more difficult because the US withdrawal made it less likely that the Kyoto Protocol would ever come into force as a legally binding agreement.</p>
<p>However, Europe quickly picked up the baton. Faced with a US president who had abdicated all responsibility to lead or even participate in the global emissions-reduction effort, the European Union led a remarkable diplomatic bid to save Kyoto.</p>
<p>To the surprise of many people, especially in the United States, this diplomatic push brought enough countries on board to save the Kyoto Protocol, which <a href="http://www.nature.com/news/2005/050214/full/news050214-7.html">came into force in 2005 following Russia’s ratification</a>.</p>
<h2>What will happen this time?</h2>
<p>While the withdrawal of the United States slowed international efforts back then, as it doubtless will now, this time around the world is in a better position to respond.</p>
<p>First, the Paris agreement has already <a href="http://unfccc.int/paris_agreement/items/9444.php">come into force</a> and global ambition is arguably stronger today than it was in 2001. Whereas the Kyoto Protocol took almost a decade to come into force, the Paris Agreement has taken <a href="https://theconversation.com/paris-climate-agreement-enters-into-force-international-experts-respond-68124">less than a year</a>. And importantly, whereas countries with emerging economies shied away from any commitment to limit their greenhouse gas emissions under the Kyoto Protocol, this is not so today. Under the Paris deal, both developed and developing countries have pledged to rein in their emissions.</p>
<p>Second, should Europe decide to take on a leadership role as it did in 2001, the rise of China offers a new and potentially powerful partner. China is now the world’s number-one <a href="https://www.iea.org/newsroom/news/2010/july/2010-07-20-.html">energy consumer</a> and <a href="http://www.wri.org/blog/2014/11/6-graphs-explain-world%E2%80%99s-top-10-emitters">greenhouse emitter</a>. But it has also been one of the most active proponents of climate action.</p>
<p>Under the Paris agreement China has already <a href="https://theconversation.com/an-emerging-renewables-superpower-chinas-climate-pledge-guns-for-green-growth-44142">agreed to cap its emissions</a> and is actively taking steps to reduce its reliance on fossil fuels, especially coal. <a href="http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/abs/ngeo2777.html">Recent data</a> indicate that China’s coal consumption peaked in 2014 and is now set to decline.</p>
<h2>Filling the void</h2>
<p>If Europe and China together decide to fill the vacuum left by the United States, they could form a powerful bloc to lead global efforts against climate change. Leaders in Europe have already hinted at retaliation should the United States withdraw from the Paris Agreement, with former French presidential candidate Nicolas Sarkozy suggesting a <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/donald-trump-us-carbon-tax-nicolas-sarkozy-global-warming-paris-climate-deal-a7418301.html">carbon tax on US imports</a>. Should China follow the same path, together they would represent the largest import market in the world, giving them a very large stick to wave at America.</p>
<p>An EU-China bloc could also help to ensure that there is less potential for other nations, including Australia, to follow the United States down the do-nothing path. </p>
<p>That said, while the world’s politicians may be in a better position than in 2001 to deal with the fallout from another recalcitrant American administration, the world’s climate is not. The growth in fossil fuel emissions has been <a href="https://theconversation.com/fossil-fuel-emissions-have-stalled-global-carbon-budget-2016-68568">slowed but not yet reversed</a>, and global temperatures <a href="https://theconversation.com/world-set-for-hottest-year-on-record-world-meteorological-organization-68567">continue to climb</a>. The effects are evident around the world, not least in this year’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/coral-bleaching-taskforce-more-than-1-000-km-of-the-great-barrier-reef-has-bleached-57282">devastating bleaching of the Great Barrier Reef</a>.</p>
<p>We should expect that President-elect Trump will withdraw from the Paris Agreement. Even if he changes his mind (which he has done on plenty of other issues), there are many in the Republican Party who will hold him to his word.</p>
<p>The climate isn’t waiting to see what a President Trump does, and neither should the world. Should China and Europe decide to lead, many nations will follow, and one day soon so too will the United States.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/69211/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Christian Downie does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>If Donald Trump turns away from climate action as George W. Bush did, Europe and China can respond by forming an alliance that will turn the United States from a climate leader into a follower.Christian Downie, Vice Chancellor’s Postdoctoral Research Fellow, UNSW SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/690562016-11-21T22:45:22Z2016-11-21T22:45:22ZMarrakech climate talks produced defiance towards Trump, but little else<p>In many ways, the Marrakech climate summit was entirely ordinary. As is usually the case, the first week was spent drowning in technical detail while most of the second was dedicated to photo opportunities and political speeches. And as always the negotiations ran over time, finishing early on Saturday morning.</p>
<p>But while this latest “Conference of the Parties” (COP) was intended to be an “action COP”, aimed at getting down to the business of implementing the Paris Climate Agreement reached last year, it will mainly be remembered as the “Trump COP”. It was a summit held under the spectre of renewed US climate recalcitrance in the wake of the surprise election result, which dropped like a bombshell on the summit’s third day. </p>
<p>The main topic of debate in the first week was the creation of a “Paris Rulebook”, set to be finalised by the end of 2018. The <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-paris-climate-agreement-at-a-glance-50465">Paris Agreement</a> sets up a loose skeleton for a pledge-and-review system of deepening emissions-reduction targets over the coming decades. Marrakech was intended to be one of the main political moments to put some flesh on the bare bones of this framework. </p>
<p>Such details included establishing the target years for future pledges, how to ensure transparency in action, and how the collective review of pledges (the “global stocktake”) would be conducted. </p>
<p>The going was slow and the outcomes procedural. On many issues, countries have got no further than agreeing on what questions need answering. The answers will have to wait for next November’s climate summit in Bonn.</p>
<p>Moreover, the schism between developed and developing countries over their respective responsibility for the climate problem began to reappear after being largely buried in Paris.</p>
<p>The meeting agreed that 2017 will mark the start of a five-year plan to address “<a href="http://unfccc.int/adaptation/workstreams/loss_and_damage/items/7545.php">Loss and Damage</a>”, a broad category that includes both sudden and chronic climate impacts. But the tricky question of whether to continue with the Kyoto Protocol’s <a href="http://unfccc.int/cooperation_and_support/financial_mechanism/adaptation_fund/items/3659.php">Adaptation Fund</a> – created in 2001 to help developing countries deal with climate adaptation costs – was also kicked down the road for future discussions. </p>
<h2>Roadmaps and ratification</h2>
<p>Yet despite the slow progress of the central negotiations, Marrakech also produced plenty of promises of future action. Australia was among 11 countries that <a href="http://unfccc.int/2860.php#auv">ratified the Paris Agreement during the summit</a>, bringing the total to 111 since the treaty opened for signatures in April. The fact that countries continued to ratify even after Donald Trump won the keys to the White House was seen as a hopeful sign of resistance against his promise to unravel the Paris treaty. </p>
<p>During the summit’s closing days, 47 of the world’s poorest and most climatically vulnerable countries pledged to shift to 100% renewable energy <a href="http://www.thecvf.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/CVF-Vision-For-Adoption.pdf">as soon as possible</a>. </p>
<p>Many richer and more powerful countries showed ambition too. <a href="http://www.wri.org/blog/2016/11/germany-becomes-first-country-release-2050-emissions-reduction-plan">Germany</a> and Brazil were among 22 countries – plus 15 cities and 196 businesses – that committed to the “<a href="http://newsroom.unfccc.int/media/791671/2050-pathways-platform-announcement.pdf">2050 pathways platform</a>”, which involves developing strategies to become largely carbon-neutral by mid-century. </p>
<p>The United States signed up to the platform too, unveiling a plan to cut greenhouse emissions by at least 80%, relative to 2005 levels, by 2050. Unfortunately, this is unlikely to become official US government policy any time in at least the next four years. </p>
<p>There was also the release of the “<a href="http://unfccc.int/files/meetings/marrakech_nov_2016/application/pdf/marrakech_action_proclamation.pdf">Marrakech Action Proclamation</a>”, an ambitious if vague one-pager pushed by the Moroccan government. The proclamation reaffirms numerous existing agreements and commits to the “full implementation” of the Paris Agreement and “to bring together the whole international community”. </p>
<p>Two common threads unite these various initiatives. First, while all are ambitious, they all also lack legal substance and specifics. They are political promises made in a time of tumult. </p>
<p>Second, they have a clear subtext: a note of defiance in the face of the potential <a href="https://theconversation.com/president-trump-could-kill-the-paris-agreement-but-climate-action-will-survive-68596">threat that President-elect Trump</a> poses to the Paris Agreement. </p>
<h2>The Trump COP</h2>
<p>Before November 9, the negotiations seemed largely unperturbed by the external world, secure in the prospect of a Hillary Clinton victory.</p>
<p>The election result’s impact was stark. Young activists wept and rallied; civil society held emergency strategy sessions. Many of the negotiations continued unabated, but unease was expressed behind the scenes.</p>
<p>Some delegations used the US election outcome for more sinister purposes. Saudi Arabia was reported to have told some delegations that Paris was dead under President-elect Trump, and that negotiations should instead turn back towards the original <a href="http://unfccc.int/essential_background/convention/items/6036.php">UN climate convention</a> first agreed in 1992.</p>
<p>Behind closed doors, ministers doubtless discussed how to handle the incipient Trump presidency. The (<a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-38047046">now defeated</a>) French presidential candidate Nicholas Sarkozy <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/donald-trump-us-carbon-tax-nicolas-sarkozy-global-warming-paris-climate-deal-a7418301.html">threatened to put a carbon tax on US imports</a> if Trump withdraws from the Paris Agreement. </p>
<p>Just one day after the election, Venezuela publicly asked a US negotiator whether Trump would cause a “second Kyoto” – a reference to the disruption caused by former president George W. Bush’s refusal to ratify the earlier treaty. The response was coy, noting that no one knows what Trump will actually do.</p>
<p>Almost every side event had at least one Trump-related question that sent silent shudders through the room. France’s current president, François Hollande, <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/19/us-climate-commitment-irreversible-francois-hollande-warns-donal/">warned Trump that the Paris Agreement is “irreversible”</a>.</p>
<p>On the final day, the incoming presidency of Fiji (which will host the next climate summit in Bonn rather than at home) pleaded with Trump and invited him to visit the island nation to see the effects of climate change at first hand.</p>
<p>But there was little beyond the bluster. These were all emotive moments that drew applause, but ultimately were toothless speeches that neither Trump nor his transition team is likely to hear or heed. </p>
<p>Unfortunately, the official negotiations did not make the time to discuss how to address a renegade United States. This has been justified as a <a href="http://www.climatecentral.org/news/agonizing-wait-for-trump-to-speak-on-climate-policy-20881">“wait and see” approach</a>, but it looks more like a rabbit stuck in the headlights.</p>
<p>The negotiators in Marrakech spent so much time discussing future processes, yet could not summon the courage and foresight to confront a potentially existential threat head-on. A cynic would say that is fitting and symbolic of the climate negotiations to date.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/69056/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Luke Kemp has received funding from the Australian and German governments. </span></em></p>The latest climate summit began the long slog towards putting the Paris Agreement into action. But it generated more questions than answers, particularly on how to handle a Trump-led United States.Luke Kemp, Lecturer in International Relations and Environmental Policy, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/685972016-11-11T12:42:21Z2016-11-11T12:42:21ZThe view from Marrakech: climate talks are battling through a Trump tsunami<p>Stunned. Shocked. Speechless. Devastated. Political tsunami. These were the key words rising to the surface of the babble of conversations that took place in the corridors of the climate negotiations in Marrakech on Wednesday 9 November – the day Donald Trump won the US presidency.</p>
<p>A climate denier, Trump has vowed to tear up the historic <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-paris-climate-agreement-at-a-glance-50465">Paris Agreement</a> along with the Obama administration’s <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/president-obama-climate-action-plan#section-clean-power-plan">Clean Power Plan</a>, which seeks to slash greenhouse emissions from power plants. He has also given the green light to renewed fossil fuel exploitation in the United States. </p>
<p>Oil and gas stocks unsurprisingly <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-global-oil-idUSKBN134024">rose</a>, and coal stocks <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-climatechange-idUSKBN1342E0">soared</a>, on his victory day. If implemented, Trump’s promises would make it impossible for the United States to reach its national pledge under the Paris Agreement to reduce emissions by 26-28% relative to 2005 by 2025.</p>
<p>At the moment, Trump’s previous declaration of climate change as a hoax perpetrated by the Chinese to undermine US industry looks particularly poignant.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"265895292191248385"}"></div></p>
<p>His election is a dramatic turnaround from the years of constructive bilateral climate diplomacy by the Obama administration with China, which culminated in the joint <a href="https://theconversation.com/us-china-climate-deal-at-last-a-real-game-changer-on-emissions-34148">US-China statement on climate change</a> in November 2014. This joint announcement of the headline national action plans by the world’s two biggest emitters (together covering 40% of global emissions) injected significant momentum into the negotiations leading to the Paris Agreement in 2015.</p>
<p>But now the US elections have delivered not just a presidential victory against action on climate change, but made it much easier for Trump to deliver on his plans than it was for Obama. The Republican Party is now set to control all four branches of government: the House of Representatives, the Senate, the Presidency and soon the Supreme Court (once Trump nominates a new judge following the death of Justice Scalia, bringing the number of judges back to nine, with a conservative majority). This leaves only the media and civil society to speak up for a safe climate in the face of the national government’s agenda.</p>
<h2>Turning back time</h2>
<p>Seasoned negotiators and observers at Marrakech with long memories recalled the moment in 2001 when former president George W. Bush declared that the United States would withdraw from the Kyoto Protocol, the predecessor to the Paris Agreement. This withdrawal cast a long shadow over the negotiations, which was finally lifted with the Obama administration’s re-engagement with climate change that made the Paris breakthrough possible.</p>
<p>Yet the world today is very different to what it was in 2001. The Paris Agreement is <a href="https://theconversation.com/paris-climate-agreement-enters-into-force-international-experts-respond-68124">now in force</a> after a speedy ratification, the US share of global emissions has declined, and renewable energy is now much cheaper. Many US states, cities and businesses will continue to work towards reducing emissions, and many Republican politicians have let go of their aversion to renewable energy in response to public and business pressure. </p>
<p>In short, much of America and the rest of the world will continue to build momentum under the Paris Agreement, despite the changing of the guard in Washington DC.</p>
<p>Given Trump’s record of policy flip-flopping, it also remains an open question as to how far he will actually go to undo the diplomatic climate legacy of the Obama administration. Much will depend on who takes over as Secretary of State, and how the State Department assesses the broader diplomatic consequences of withdrawing from the Paris treaty, particularly in terms of transatlantic relationships. European Council president Donald Tusk has already <a href="http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-usa-election-eu-invitation-idUKKBN1341GW">invited Trump to attend a US-EU summit</a>. We might therefore see some easing of Trump’s hard anti-climate talk, much as his social rhetoric <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/10/us/politics/trump-speech-transcript.html">softened on election night</a>. Trump the President may not be quite the same as Trump the candidate.</p>
<p>Moreover, under Article 28 of the Paris Agreement it will take a total of four years for any formal withdrawal by the United States to take effect. If the US were to turn its back on these legal niceties and abandon its obligations during this period, it would be widely regarded as a climate pariah state. In contrast, China will enjoy its rising status as a climate leader.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, after the initial pause to digest the shock of Trump’s victory, the negotiators at Marrakech have got back down to their business, which is to fill in the implementation details of the Paris Agreement.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/68597/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Robyn Eckersley receives funding from the Australian Research Council to research a project called 'What makes a climate leader?'</span></em></p>The halls of the Marrakech climate summit have been filled with fearful talk about Donald Trump’s presidency. But there is hope that the Paris climate treaty can weather the political storm.Robyn Eckersley, Professor of Political Science, School of Social and Political Sciences, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/685862016-11-10T05:46:27Z2016-11-10T05:46:27ZAustralia to ratify the Paris climate deal, under a large Trump-shaped shadow<p>Australia’s government has announced that it is to <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-10/federal-government-to-ratify-paris-climate-change-agreement/8012696">ratify the Paris climate agreement</a>, which was struck 11 months ago and entered into force last Friday.</p>
<p>The move comes despite the election of Donald Trump, who has <a href="http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/jun/03/hillary-clinton/yes-donald-trump-did-call-climate-change-chinese-h/">called climate change a Chinese-inspired hoax</a>. Trump has pledged to <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/27/us/politics/donald-trump-global-warming-energy-policy.html?_r=0">turn his back on the Paris treaty</a> after he takes office in January, although this would take at least a year and <a href="https://theconversation.com/president-trump-will-change-the-united-states-and-the-world-but-just-how-remains-to-be-seen-68328">technically leave the Agreement still in force, albeit weakened</a>.</p>
<p>The question for Australia is how Canberra will react to such a seismic shift in US climate policy. The last time a US president pulled the plug on international climate negotiations was in March 2001, when George W. Bush <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2001/mar/29/globalwarming.usnews">withdrew from the Kyoto treaty</a>. Australia’s prime minister John Howard <a href="https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/australia-rejects-kyoto-protocol/169527.article">followed suit on Earth Day 2002</a>.</p>
<p>The temptation for Australia’s current government would be to follow in Trump’s slipstream in much the same way. Despite its 2030 climate target being <a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-2030-climate-target-puts-us-in-the-race-but-at-the-back-45931">widely seen as unambitious</a>, Australia still <a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-climate-targets-still-out-of-reach-after-second-emissions-auction-50519">lacks a credible plan to deliver the necessary emissions cuts</a>, and has no renewable energy target beyond 2020.</p>
<p>While Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull may be a vocal supporter of climate action, not everyone on on his side of politics is as keen – such as MPs <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/aug/29/climate-sceptic-mp-appointed-chair-of-environment-and-energy-committee">Craig Kelly</a> and <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-09/backbencher-likens-climate-change-to-science-fiction-film-plot/5583734">George Christensen</a>. (It was <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-climate-denial-gained-a-foothold-in-the-liberal-party-and-why-it-still-wont-go-away-56013">not always thus under the Liberals</a>.)</p>
<p>The temptation to defect might be strong, but the countervailing pressure will be much stronger that it was in 2002, and the <a href="http://newsroom.unsw.edu.au/sites/default/files/attachments/article/leadership_forum_on_energy_transition_-_member_profiles.pdf">clean energy transition</a> is already underway. Just this week, a high-powered group of business leaders, energy providers, academics and financiers <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/nov/07/quentin-bryce-in-high-powered-group-calling-for-coal-power-to-be-phased-out">called on Turnbull</a> to expand the renewable energy target and create a market mechanism to phase out coal.</p>
<p>Yet the US election has also reinvigorated Australian opponents of climate action, such as One Nation senators Pauline Hanson and Malcolm Roberts, who were <a href="http://www.news.com.au/national/politics/one-nation-senator-pauline-hanson-makes-toasts-donald-trump-to-victory/news-story/5f21193fe75fcafb3f90e6877a0bae4b">cracking champagne</a> at the prospect of Trump in the White House, and media commentator Andrew Bolt, who <a href="http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/opinion/andrew-bolt/andrew-bolt-donald-trump-us-election-win-a-revolt-against-lefts-arrogance/news-story/8e658e13e928a1b935587c3634c5a1de">jubilantly described Trump’s victory</a> as a “revolt against the left’s arrogance”.</p>
<h2>Which bit of history will repeat?</h2>
<p>On balance, then, it is still hard to predict Australia’s next move – and past form is little guide for future performance. </p>
<p>Over the past 26 years, Australia has made two largely symbolic commitments to international climate action, and one very concrete refusal. </p>
<p>In 1990, ahead of the 2nd World Climate Conference which fired the starting gun for the United Nations’ climate negotiations, the Hawke government <a href="https://theconversation.com/25-years-ago-the-australian-government-promised-deep-emissions-cuts-and-yet-here-we-still-are-46805">announced a target of a 20% reduction by 2005</a>. </p>
<p>The pledge, however, was laced with crucial caveats, like this one:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>…the Government will not proceed with measures which have net adverse economic impacts nationally or on Australia’s trade competitiveness in the absence of similar action by major greenhouse-gas-producing countries.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This target was sidelined in the final <a href="http://unfccc.int/essential_background/convention/items/6036.php">United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change</a>, which Australia signed and ratified in 1992.</p>
<p>In 1997, Australia got a very sweet deal at the Kyoto climate talks, successfully negotiating an 8% <em>increase</em> in greenhouse gases as its emissions “reduction” target, as well as a special loophole that allowed it take account of its large reduction in land clearing since 1990. Australia signed the deal in April 1998, but never ratified it.</p>
<p>Kyoto’s rules hid a multitude of sins, anyway, as Oxford University’s Nicholas Howarth and Andrew Foxall have <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0962629810000648">pointed out</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>…its accounting rules obscure the real level of carbon emissions and structural trends at the nation-state level… it has shifted focus away from Australia as the world’s largest coal exporter towards China, its primary customer.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Although Kevin Rudd famously ratified Kyoto and received a standing ovation at the Bali Climate summit in 2007, a stronger Australian emissions reduction target was not forthcoming. </p>
<p>The next big moment came at the Paris negotiations of 2015. Australia’s official pledge was a 26-28% reduction on 2005 levels by 2030 – a target unveiled by the former prime minister Tony Abbott, and which <a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-2030-climate-target-puts-us-in-the-race-but-at-the-back-45931">met with a lukewarm response</a> from analysts. </p>
<p>Since then, pressure has been building for Australia to explain how it can meet even that target, given the hostility to renewable energy among the federal government, the lack of a post-2020 renewables target, and the <a href="https://theconversation.com/on-these-numbers-australias-emissions-auction-wont-get-the-job-done-40761">inadequacy</a> of the current Direct Action policy.</p>
<p>And now we are looking at the prospect of a Trump presidency, already described as “<a href="https://thinkprogress.org/trump-victory-climate-a0c595572299#.83mw6bf2k">a turning point in the history of climate action</a>” and “<a href="http://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2016/11/9/13575684/trump-2-degrees">the end of any serious hope of limiting climate change to 2 degrees</a>”.</p>
<p>In a chaotic world that has confounded pollsters, it seems foolish to bet on anything. But two predictions seem sure: atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide will rise, and the future will be … interesting.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/68586/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Marc Hudson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has announced plans to ratify the Paris climate agreement, a day after US participation in the treaty was thrown into dought by Donald Trump’s election victory.Marc Hudson, PhD Candidate, Sustainable Consumption Institute, University of ManchesterLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.