As it opened, so it closed: with a theatrical flourish. Having exploited the opening day to put Cop28 in the spotlight through a promise of funding for the loss and damage fund (which subsequently faded into obscurity along with all climate finance) wrested from heads of state and government, president Sultan Ahmed al-Jaber decided to fire one last firework, once again surprising the world by approving the first global stocktake in a literal three minutes — springing the "magic formula" on the plenary at the outset, taking centre stage from the podium as the room greeted the snap decision with applause and an "impromptu" standing ovation.

The comments, the interventions, the criticisms of the text? Those came afterwards. After the result had been locked in and handed to the international press, by which point it was satisfied and distracted. This preamble is essential to understanding the approach al-Jaber wanted to give the entire climate conference. With a new, carefully engineered hype that dictated the communications line to follow, helped along by a few tears shed by delegates, observers and journalists during his thank-you speech.

What the final document says on mitigation

Now to the substance. The global stocktake is a kind of balance sheet to understand what has been done and what still needs to be done to meet the objectives of the Paris Agreement on climate. That is, to try to stay as close as possible to 1.5 degrees Celsius of average global temperature increase, given that, despite the promises made and the words spoken, the road to action is still long and complex. This was precisely Cop28's task: to draw a line and work out how to make the journey smoother and faster.

We had left off at the duel between phase out (gradual elimination) and phase down (gradual reduction) of fossil fuels, staged by the group of more ambitious countries on one side — such as the European Union and island states — and the Arab oil and gas producing countries on the other. Dozens of hours of negotiations after that draft was declared "unacceptable" by Spain's Environment Minister and co-leader of the European delegation, Teresa Ribera — forcing al-Jaber to roll up his sleeves — a solution was found in a third way.

The words of Spanish Minister Teresa Ribera following the first draft of the final document

How to interpret this choice of wording

A new expression — the product of an evident compromise — was adopted: transitioning away. That is, transitioning away from fossil fuels in order to achieve net zero emissions by 2050, in line with what the science tells us.

A key passage found in paragraph 28, point (d): Transitioning away from fossil fuels in energy systems, in a just, orderly and equitable manner, accelerating action in this critical decade, so as to achieve net zero by 2050 in keeping with the science.

It was Wopke Hoekstra, European Commissioner for Climate Action and leader of the European negotiations at Cop28, who answered this question directly for LifeGate: "As the European Union we came here to certify the beginning of the end of fossil fuels; we said we would bring home the phase out and, in different words, we got exactly what we wanted. As a lawyer, I can assure you that the two expressions mean the same thing." A victory, then, but one that must contend with the reality of things — which are listed in precise and disarming detail within the same final document of Cop28.

The words of Commissioner Wopke Hoekstra following the adoption of the global stocktake

Where we actually stand in the fight against the climate crisis

Since the Paris Agreement, the mitigation pledges — to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, nationally determined contributions — made by countries have led to a revision of the projected average global temperature increase, which has fallen from 4 to 2.1–2.8 degrees Celsius. The countries that have made these pledges account for 87 per cent of the global economy in terms of aggregate gross domestic product, and this should lead to a reduction in global emissions of 2 per cent by 2030 compared with the level recorded in 2019. The trouble is that the science tells us the reduction should be 43 per cent, rising to 60 per cent by 2035 if we want to hit the net zero emissions target by 2050. But the reality is that there is a gap even between the pledges and what has been done so far. The latest projections put us on a trajectory towards an increase, not a reduction, in CO2 of 14 per cent between now and 2030. All of this is written in black and white in the very document approved in Dubai. Words, numbers, data that point to a total disconnect between the evidence of the facts and the narrative constructed around them.

The fear that there will not be enough time to follow the tight pathway that science has set out to bring net emissions to zero within a quarter of a century — yes, there are only 26 years left until 2050 — is also evident from what can be read before and after point (d) that so captivated those in the field.

For instance, point (b) of paragraph 28 reads: Accelerating efforts towards the phase-down of unabated coal power.

The same disappointing wording reached at the end of Cop26 in Glasgow, when it proved impossible to "phase out" — gradually, of course — even unabated coal, that is, coal that causes direct atmospheric emissions because it is not subject to carbon capture and storage (Ccs). And today, two years on, not only is this weak action reproduced verbatim, but there is a call to accelerate the phase down, because we are not even managing that.

Akshat Rathi @AkshatRathi

𝕏

While nearly 200 countries negotiate text to phase out fossil fuels, India's coal ministry announces its plan to nearly double its coal production to 1.5 billion tons annually by 2030.

Also: "100% Foreign Direct Investment has also been allowed." pib.gov.in/PressReleasePa…

♥ 15💬 5 11 dic 2023 · Apri su X →

Finally, as in the "unacceptable" draft, point (h) has survived: Phasing out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies that do not address energy poverty or just transitions, as soon as possible.

That is, banning subsidies for the development of fossil sources whose consumption is not aimed at combating energy poverty. Heaven forbid that anyone should decide to invest massively in clean sources.

A passage that goes hand in hand with paragraph 29, as brief as it is painful: Recognizes that transitional fuels can play a role in facilitating the energy transition while ensuring energy security.

What are these transitional fuels, these fuels for the transition? A question that has no answer as yet, although according to Mauro Albrizio, head of Legambiente's European office in Brussels, the reference is clearly to gas and hydrogen, precisely because they are "fuels". A reading confirmed by the reaction of the United States Special Presidential Envoy for Climate, John Kerry, who was keen to point out that transitional fuels can play only a marginal role and should be used only for high-impact industrial sectors and only when linked to carbon capture and storage systems.

Earth Negotiations Bulletin @IISD_ENB

𝕏

At #COP28 @JohnKerry, US, emphasizes that to be in line with the 1.5°C target, the use of transitional fuels can only play a limited and temporary role, and notes the use of abatement technology should focus on hard to abate sectors

♥ 21💬 1 13 dic 2023 · Apri su X →

Conclusion: we must turn the overused word "action" into action

An analysis that inevitably leads us to a twofold judgement on what has taken place over these two weeks in Dubai. If in words it has been possible to say and write that the era of fossil fuels must end without being accused of wanting to overturn the global capitalist system, on the other hand there has been a complete failure to put down in black and white how to do it.

In closing, special mention is deserved by the very person who risked derailing al-Jaber's presidency at Cop28 while it was under way: Mary Robinson, former President of Ireland and United Nations Special Envoy for Climate. "If 1.5 degrees is our north star and science our compass," Robinson commented after the final plenary, "we must rapidly phase out all fossil fuels to chart the path towards a future worth living in," because "every day of delay condemns millions of people to an unliveable world."