At the world climate conference, the delegates bend over key points for the final paper. There is a lot of shadow and only a few bright spots. Will the UN meeting be extended, as is so often the case?
Too lax, too long and inherently contradictory: Environmental organizations and dozens of government representatives have reacted to the key points of the final declaration of the UN climate summit in Egypt with sometimes sharp criticism.
In the 20-page paper with many unresolved issues, a gradual phase-out of climate-damaging coal is called for – but not a farewell to oil and gas. Also unresolved at COP27 was the dispute as to whether poor countries would receive compensation payments from industrialized countries for inevitable climate damage – such as after droughts, floods and storms. Due to global warming, these extreme weather events are becoming more severe and frequent, hitting poor countries the hardest.
The paper was presented to the representatives of about 200 countries by the Egyptian conference leadership early in the morning – one day before the planned end of the mammoth meeting in Sharm el-Sheikh. Climate protectors spoke of a “construction site” and many unanswered questions, but also saw rays of hope.
Coal, oil and gas?
The executive director of Greenpeace Germany, Martin Kaiser, said that the global phase-out of oil and gas must now be incorporated into the document “at high pressure”. Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock (Greens) must also personally campaign for this. “It would be absolutely unacceptable if at the end of a two-week climate conference in the midst of climate collapse the results of the previous year were repeated at most.”
The day before, Baerbock had emphasized that the climate conference had to set signals for the farewell to coal, oil and gas. It is worth fighting for “every tenth of a degree less global warming”.
Oxfam expert Jan Kowalzig told the German Press Agency that it would be “a major oversight” if the conference did not send out a clear signal that the move away from all fossil fuels is inevitable. The director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Johan Rockström, criticized the fact that Saudi Arabia, for example, did not want to talk about fossil fuels when it came to climate protection. It’s like saying that the economy isn’t about money.
The two-week conference, which was attended by around 34,000 people, is scheduled to end on Friday. An extension is quite likely.
Poorer countries insist on compensation payments
In the struggle for compensation payments for climate damage, developing countries and particularly threatened island states sounded the alarm – and made industrialized countries like Germany responsible. “Why should we pay the highest price?” asked Molwyn Joseph, who represents the Antigua and Barbuda group of small island states. A fund to compensate for climate damage must now be decided at this conference. Anything else would be “no less than fraud”.
Pakistani Climate Minister Sherry Rehman warned: “The clock is ticking – not only for this COP, but also for humanity.” She represents the group of G77 – an association of meanwhile more than 130 developing countries. The permanent establishment of a financial pot is the least that has to come.
Foreign Minister Baerbock also made China responsible, which now emits the most greenhouse gases in the world in terms of volume. The People’s Republic would then also have to pay for future damage “if they are not prepared to radically reduce their own emissions in the future,” she told RTL and n-tv. The Vice President of the EU Commission, Frans Timmermans, made a similar statement.
Tom Evans from the climate think tank E3G confirmed that the Egyptian presidency did not have a “uniform vision” for compromise lines. “We’re not where we need to be.”
The text also calls on states to improve their largely inadequate climate protection plans that they submit to the UN by the next climate conference at the latest. It will take place in the United Arab Emirates at the end of 2023.
1.5 degree limit
Oxfam expert Kowalzig complained that no useful conclusions were drawn from the fact that the plans are too lax. “In this respect, the text lacks a great deal of urgency and political will to turn things around before the important 1.5°C limit falls out of reach.”
In 2015, the states agreed in Paris to limit warming to 1.5 degrees compared to pre-industrial times. The world has now warmed up by a good 1.1 degrees, Germany even more. According to scientific warnings, exceeding the 1.5-degree mark significantly increases the risk of triggering so-called tipping elements in the climate system and thus uncontrollable chain reactions.
David Ryfisch from Germanwatch told the dpa that the COP27 is far from a result that everyone can support. “It is worrying that the proposal falls behind the results of last year’s world climate summit in some areas.” On the other hand, positive is the strong reference to the results of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and to the need for a reform of the international financial architecture so that all money flows towards climate protection.
French diplomat Laurence Tubiana, credited with being the architect of the 2015 Paris climate agreement, put pressure on the negotiators, saying: “Stop the hypocrisy and gimmicks on crucial issues!”
Climate Conference website – English Cornerstones, Engl.