2023-12-14 01:37:10
The environmental organization categorically rejects the inclusion in the text of nuclear, carbon capture and other false solutions, while affirming that, without a radical change in the capitalist system dependent on fossils, away from patriarchal, neocolonial and extractivist structures , it will be impossible to achieve climate justice
After eleven in the morning in Dubai, the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change adopted the latest draft agreement, presented this morning. The text, source of major conflicts between geopolitical blocks throughout the last few days, now has the unanimous approval of the countries. For environmental, feminist and union organizations, the text is insufficient and full of “leaks” that, they say, can allow serious breaches of what has been agreed so far.
For environmental, feminist and union organizations, the text is insufficient and full of “leaks” that, they say, can allow serious breaches of what has been agreed so far.
The night, which was very long for the negotiating teams, allowed for the development of a third version of the most important document that had to come out of COP28: the Balance Global. The other approved packages are those relating to financing (in general terms and also, specifically, for adaptation and loss and damage) and mitigation.
End fossil fuels
The great objective of putting an end to fossil fuels is included in the text, but again with a confusing wording that does not establish with the necessary clarity a differentiated end to fossil fuels aligned with scientific indications.
Even though it appears, for the first time in a COP textthe need to move away from all fossil fuels, from subsidies to polluting industries or the need to reduce emissions by half in 2030, This Global Balance is very far from the current urgency and being able to limit the increase in global temperature by 1.5ºC.
For Ecologists in Action the inclusion of false solutionssuch as nuclear energy, “alternative” fuels or carbon capture, represents an enormous danger for all of humanity and opens the door for business interests and the need for profit of large companies to come before them, instead of allocating efforts to already proven technologies such as renewables.
The final text remains a transfer to oil-producing countries such as the United States and Saudi Arabiawho have blocked explicit mentions in previous drafts of putting a fair and definitive end to fossil fuels quickly, once again ignoring scientific evidence.
Likewise, the inability of the countries of the global North —to facilitate the financing and tools necessary for the countries of the global South to be able to opt for alternative development models— prevents greater progress in the climate fight, due to the enormous dependence of these countries on fossils for the eradication of poverty. Objectives such as tripling renewables will hardly be able to provide a response to the climate emergency if they are not based on the replacement of fossils and are especially directed at the most vulnerable communities.
Loss and damage
Although this summit began with the historic decision to launch the loss and damage fund, the inclusion of this fund in the final text is insufficient, due to the rejection of the Northern countries. Its inability to accept loss and damage as the third pillar of financing only serves to increase the mistrust of the most vulnerable countries.
The final approved version includes recognition of existing funding gaps. Furthermore, it could leave open the possibility of new sources of financing, such as the start-up of new taxes on wealth or a tax on profits fallen from the sky of large companies, although this does not appear specifically in the final wording.
In conclusion, the loss and damage section leaves the most vulnerable populations and regions unprotected and moves further away from climate justice.
However, and following the tone of the document, the text continues without responding with the necessary forcefulness. The elimination of the mention of people, and the knowledge of the indigenous population, or the references to human rights is incomprehensible. Also ignores the need to implement programs with a gender perspective. In conclusion, the loss and damage section leaves the most vulnerable populations and regions unprotected and moves further away from climate justice.
Financing
The financing package has lights and shadows to his credit, which for Ecologists in Action is worrying, after the progress of recent years. In his words, it turns out “incomprehensible and hypocritical the lack of clarity and commitment on the part of the global North to contribute to the necessary financing.”
He New Quantified Collective Objective (1), one of the great processes that are underway and must be completed at next year’s summit in Bakustands out positively with mentions of debt, fiscal space and the need for climate financing not to financially harm countries in the global South.
It fails to recognize the illegitimacy of debt and, more worryingly, continues to rely on structures like the World Bank that are responsible for global inequality
However, it fails to recognize the illegitimacy of debt and, more worryingly, continues to rely on structures like the World Bank that are responsible for global inequality. The financing text as a whole maintains a language that lacks the firmness necessary and opens the door to private financing. Also notable is the absence of action verbs and a more severe reminder to the Parties about the need to compensate for the amount that continues to be lacking in the Green Climate Fund.
Adaptation
The final approved document does not achieve the necessary ambition regarding the global adaptation objective. Although, for the first time, there is a mention of IPCCC and the need to accelerate the implementation of adaptation, the mention is also removed —which did appear in the latest version— about the historical responsibility of the countries of the global North, their obligation to offer new additional funds and continue increasing them in the coming years.
Also missing, as is generally lacking in the summit conclusions, is greater consideration of gender issues, something that is mentioned only twice in this specific package.
Regarding financing for adaptation, once again the vagueness of language and lack of commitment by the global North, as well as the lack of explicit mention of loss and damage. Also missing, as is generally lacking in the summit conclusions, is greater consideration of gender issues, something that is mentioned only twice in this specific package. For Ecologists in Action, there is evidence of “There is a lack of serious commitment to the financing we need.”
Reactions and civil society
The countries of the small island states, which are in serious danger, have expressed their concern at the closing plenary of the summit about the insufficiency of the agreements reached, and have stressed that exponential change is needed to confront the climate emergency. . At the same time, they have expressed satisfaction with the mention of science, but also concern if, in practice, these scientific recommendations are ignored. Finally, they have emphasized that, although the end of fossil fuel subsidies is mentioned, there are legal loopholes that do not make it definitive, and they have declared that the false solutions presented in the texts are a step backwards.
The countries of the small island states, which are in serious danger, have expressed their concern at the closing plenary of the summit about the insufficiency of the agreements reached, and have stressed that exponential change is needed to confront the climate emergency. .
For his part, hethe social organizations present at COP28 have come together these days to demand an end to fossil fuels and the need for additional, public and sufficient financing. At the close of the Climate Summit, as they leave the negotiations venue, They insist that the real effort must come from the people to continue developing alternatives and demanding the necessary changes in municipalities, regions and countries.
Delegation of Ecologists in Action in Dubai
After analyzing the final text, Ecologistas en Acción emphasizes that “These timid agreements must be reflected in the efforts of the Spanish State, which is still very far from complying with scientific indications and providing the necessary financing.”as shown in the latest draft of the PNIEC (2)”. Likewise, it urges the EU to keep its own word to avoid these gaps in the text throughout the Union, and to reverse, among other measures, the inclusion of some of these technologies in the EU taxonomy.
Javier Andaluz, responsible for Climate and Energy: “This decision is very far from the decisive and historic action that we need. The inability of the countries of the global North to facilitate a just transition throughout the planet, together with the blockades of countries with oil interests, such as the United States and Saudi Arabia, continue to endanger 1.5°C, despite much scientific consensus. and social that is said to exist on the issue. Civil society will continue to resist the gaps and false solutions in this text and demand equitable financing.”
Sara Bourehiyi, Sustainable Finance Coordinator: “We cannot continue to delay the loss and damage fund, as a third pillar of climate finance, any longer. There is no more time to lose, the consequences of the climate crisis are already being seen throughout the world and especially in the countries of the global South. It is necessary to increase the scale of financing to trillions of dollars, in line with what science indicates, to avoid exceeding 1.5ºC”.
Rodrigo Blanca, spokesperson for Ecologists in Action Córdoba: “Without a genuine process of justice and reparation between the global North and South, without a paradigm shift from competition and domination to cooperation and trust, it will remain impossible to address the climate emergency effectively.” .
Irene Rubiera, representative of the Legal Area: “After what we have seen and experienced in recent days, this agreement is, at best, disappointing and, at worst, simply a cruel reminder that economic interests come first. on top of people’s lives. Today we begin the work for COP29 because, let the Parties, environmentalism and social movements not forget, we are going to continue defending ourselves here.”
References (1) Framework Convention on Climate Change. United Natios. (2) National Integrated Energy and Climate Plan (PNIEC). MITECO.
#COP28Hypocrisy #slows #fossil #fuels