The road from COP27
By Jeremy Cohen, Senior Partner
COP 27 saw Government delegations, scientists and civil society gathered in Sharm El-Sheikh at a time when the impacts of climate change have never been more apparent. Against a geopolitical backdrop riddled with diplomatic tensions, flexing of political muscle, and long-held frustrations from the poorest nations at the rough end of the climate change stick, we had never been more in need of clear, firm, and decisive actions.
COP27 focused on turning the ambitions announced at COP26 into urgent transformative actions. Keeping the 1.5C agreement alive was a key focus, although the vast majority of climate scientists now believe that we are going to overshoot 1.5C and even 2C by some way. The irony is that we now need to stay focussed on 1.5 degrees in order to avoid sliding into an extermination path well beyond 2 degrees. The attempts from the world’s biggest emitters to “park” the 1.5C target, and soften ambitions where possible, set the tone of the COP.
What resulted was a “victory” hiding an abject failure. Loss and damage – ensuring the biggest emitters pay for the climate damage in the developing world - was a sticking point from day one. Yes, a historic agreement was reached – in principle - to create a finance mechanism in 2023 that will support climate-vulnerable developing countries. How much? How is payment allocated? Who gets what and when? These are all questions worryingly parked for future agreement. But the G77 – representing almost 80% of the world’s population – secured a victory and will move forward with renewed ambition.
The bigger failure that loss and damage relegated from the headlines, was utter failure to deliver progress on emission reduction pledges, and to reach international agreement to phase-down or phase-out all fossil fuels, not just coal. 636 fossil fuel lobbyists – the second biggest COP delegation (!) - proved their flights to Egypt were not for nothing. Petrostates like Saudi Arabia blocked renewables being referenced as a solution, without carbon capture mentioned alongside as an alternative. We have seen natural gas being brough back into the mix as “Low Emission Energy” and part of the solution rather than part of the problem. And in an attempt to maintain a status quo and avoid popular panic, only fleeting references to the latest climate science were included in the Concluding Statement.
COP 27 will be remembered historically as the moment we resigned ourselves to a 2 or even 3 degrees of warming, and slapped backs because we promised to pay “something” to “someone” for the impending damage that pathway will create. We needed courageous leadership and a process that gets us back “on-track”. Instead, we got a compromise that’s ultimately a step backwards. It’s not for nothing that the UN announced a comprehensive review of the COP negotiating process on the same day the event closed. Questions are already being asked if the UN is a fit-for-purpose organisation to tackle the challenges facing humanity. Based on COP 27, these are good questions to ask. And all the corporate lobbyists posing as “civil society” casts a shadow across all businesses still clinging to the dream of Net Zero.