In mid December 2023 the 28th UN FCCC Conference of Parties (COP) finished. For what typically a lowest common denominator is, the widely talked about outcomes were – in the end – acceptable.
At the same time, while the Oil Lobby was chastised for its heavy presence and suspected – not in every case correctly – to undermine negotiations, few journalists made a point of noticing that the Nuclear Energy sector lobbyists were possibly even heavier represented than Big Oil.
Whether for good or worse remains to be seen. Fact though is that Nuclear made a surprising, and indeed surprisingly successful comeback at COP28, as we will see in a moment.
The big news splash evidently was that for the first time in COP history, a phase out of fossil fuels was written into the text. But while this is an important fact, and one that scientifically could not be avoided to make it into the text eventually (of only in 2023), there were a number of other firsts that got a lot less publicity, but for what our future economy and society will look like, at least as important ‘firsts’:
Important ‘Firsts’ at COP28:
- Formal recognition of fossil fuel phase-out: [Source]
This is the one we widely heard about in the news, so much so that it reads already like ‘old’ news. - Operationalization of the loss and damage fund: [Source]
The commitment pledges amount to US$700 so far.
This fund had been decided on in COP27 a year ago, and now finally got off the ground, albeit with a range of IFS and BUTs attached to it. - Formal recognition of nuclear as clean energy: [Source]
It’s both a pragmatic realisation, but is at the same time an act of throwing in the towel on even larger ambitions. Again, whether for good or bad, is something only the future will tell. Sadly, the technologies paddled at COP28 were exclusively of the old-type, the one we know so well: in essence, huge reactors built based on WW2 tech. I have yet to read that there is space and will to innovate. Innovation that would genuinely prioritise lower risk, and more scalable options in nuclear (e.g. molten salt reactors) - Declaration to Triple Nuclear Energy Capacity: [Source]
Over 20 countries signed a separate Declaration to Triple Nuclear Energy, calling for an acceleration of nuclear energy development and deployment, with a goal of tripling global nuclear capacity by 2050. - Formal recognition of the role that food, and thereby agriculture, have to play: [Source]
The COP28 agreement acknowledges the role of food systems in adaptation and resilience, and outlines its relevance for the bigger picture. - Declaration to integrate food (and hence agriculture) into climate plans: [Source]
134 countries, covering 70% of the world’s land, have signed the Emirates Declaration on Sustainable Agriculture, Resilient Food Systems, and Climate Action, committing to integrate food into their climate plans by 2025.
We will discuss more details around the inclusion of food systems and the Emirates Declaration in an upcoming post, as it is worth digging a bit further on the whys, whats and hows.
But of course: it’s not all good news
In many ways however, and that’s why the COP does tend to get a bad rep of only being a ‘talking shop’ of politicians, progress has been minimal.
Nature and Energy related Issues:
- Lack of Ambition in Climate Change Targets:
COP28 did not include significant increases in ambition in climate change targets, posing a challenge as current targets are insufficient. - Absence of Accountability Mechanism:
No genuinely reliable mechanism exists to hold countries accountable for meeting their climate change commitments. As all is carrots but no sticks, this allows for non-compliance without consequences. - Insufficient Financing to support ongoing adaption:
COP28 lacked significant new commitments to finance climate change and biodiversity loss, essential for both, developed but certainly also developing countries, to adapt and transition to clean energy. While US$ Millions is a start, the estimates are in reality something closer to US$ 400 billion per year! - Limited Progress on Fossil Fuel Phase-out:
Yes the text officially talks for the first time of fossil fuel phase. Even though we of course know that science made that clear quite some time ago.
Yet: There is little insight as to timelines … - Inadequate Attention to Ecosystem Protection:
COP28 did not include substantial commitments to protect and restore natural ecosystems, crucial for climate regulation and biodiversity preservation.
It only recognises the need to protect and restore them. The parties hence wait for ‘someone’ to bite that bullet!
Climate Justice related issues:
- Equity in Climate Change Impacts:
The Loss & Damage fund is objectively underfunded – for now no additional commitments have been made – and on top of that the World Bank has been assigned to manage it. Explicitly against the wish of the most affected countries and communities. - Inclusion of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities:
Indigenous peoples and local communities, with valuable knowledge, are often excluded from decision-making processes. To make matters worse, grassroots organisations and NGOs from most affected countries – and in contrast to global organisations such as WWF or even the French Climate Fresk Movement – did manage to secure their attendance. The reason? Access to resources, money and connection matters disproportionality. - Role of the Finance Sector:
This one is short and sweet. The finance sector has marked, for the second time in a row, a huge presence at COP28. And yet – its role in addressing climate change and biodiversity loss received insufficient attention, with – generally – a mere focus on mitigating short-term losses and increasing profits over the same time period.
Notably exceptions to this are organisations such as the UN PRI for example.
Conclusion:
COP28 was not a bad edition of the conference per se. It suffers from the already traditional ailments of such conferences: An overly politicised, short-term, GDP focused attitude of politicians that – generally – are in place for a few years only, and whose primary goal is to not anger their own citizens.
Maybe it is important to say: these politicians are actually doing a surprisingly good job at representing the tenor of their continuants, by pointing the finger at other nations then themselves to take radical action first. This is exactly how pretty much all countries and their population function at this time. Both on an individual as much as on a collective level.
Climate Action? Absolutely!
Tenor of the general population in the Global North, as represnted by its politicians
Changing my life style significantly, and that of the society we will in? Not a chance in hell – we merit a good life!
This all said, there are some objective wins: the voices of the Global South do get progressively stronger and louder. And some business players have understood so well how close they are to loosing it all, that they are willing to hang their laundry out to dry publicly.
That, to me, is encouraging, and what I’d like to remind myself of regularly.
