Another opportunity to combat climate change missed

Cop26 mainly failed.

While some countries committed to more ambitious cuts to heat-trapping pollution, many nations did not agree to rein in emissions fast enough for the world to avoid the worst damage from climate-driven storms, heat waves and droughts.

Still, the summit's progress means that goal could still be within reach, experts say — if countries follow through on their promises.

  NPR

Pardon me for being skeptical, but I'm betting they don't.

The agreement was built from compromises on many fronts, including a last minute effort by India to weaken efforts to phase-out coal.

[...]

Emissions need to fall around 45% by 2030 to give the world a chance of limiting warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius by 2100 (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit). Instead, they're expected to rise almost 14% over the next nine years.

[...]

Developing countries, already suffering damage from more intense hurricanes and droughts, made a unified plea for climate justice. Richer countries are responsible for the bulk of climate emissions, they said, but poorer countries are suffering the most. In the end, they were among the most disappointed as COP26 ended, leaving mostly with promises that their pleas would be addressed in the future.

What future?

India, a state heavily reliant on coal power, agreed to reach net-zero emissions by 2070. Saudi Arabia pledged to go net-zero by 2060, and Brazil announced 2050.

Even if they did, which they won't, that's not soon enough.

[A]dded together, the pledges will not reduce emissions fast enough to keep the world within the crucial limit of 1.5 degrees Celsius by 2100, as agreed to in the Paris climate talks. Instead, the world would be on track for 1.8 degrees Celsius of warming, according to an analysis from the International Energy Agency.

1.8 degrees Celsius is an improvement over the previous pledges. But it depends entirely on countries following through on their promises, and many have provided few concrete details. Even with past commitments, many governments haven't backed up words with actions. Based on what countries are currently doing on the ground, the world is headed toward 2.7 degrees Celsius of warming, or almost 5 degrees Fahrenheit.

[...]

More than 100 countries signed a pledge at the summit to cut methane emissions 30% by 2030. The potent greenhouse gas has 80 times the heat-trapping power of carbon dioxide when first emitted into the atmosphere.

So companies are busy trying to make fake meat. Not for the rich, I assure you.

Another coalition of countries agreed to halt deforestation by 2030, including the heavily-forested nations of Brazil and Russia.

Define "deforestation".

China, the world's largest emitter of greenhouse gases, held firm to its plan allowing emissions to rise until 2030, eventually declining to net-zero by 2060. But in a surprise announcement, the U.S. and China agreed to work together to "strengthen and accelerate climate action and cooperation" in the near-term.

"It's the first time China and the United States have stood up — the two biggest emitters in the world — and said, 'We're going to work together to accelerate the reduction,' " Kerry told NPR.

You hear that, MAGA? We're cooperating WITH CHINA.

In the end, the final agreement held as firmly as a consensus agreement can on speeding up progress, saying it "requests" countries "revisit and strengthen" their plans by 2022.

[...]

As higher temperatures fuel more destructive storms, heatwaves and fires, many poorer countries face disasters that can cost billions of dollars and add up to far more than the size of their economy. Intense droughts are wiping out crops, and rising seas are forcing entire villages to relocate.

[...]

Countries also agreed to provide more "technical assistance" for loss and damage issues by supporting the Santiago Network, a U.N. entity created in 2019 to provide advice and guidance for developing countries to minimize damage from climate change.

We'll tell you what to do while we go on doing what we want.

Developing countries brought a firm message to the Glasgow summit: we're suffering from a problem we've done little to cause. They proposed that wealthier countries compensate them for climate change-related "loss and damage."

At the summit, Scotland offered the first contribution for a loss and damage fund, two million pounds, a sign that many thought could pave the way for more nations to join in.

Two million. That'll go a long way, won't it? Still, it's better than anyone else did.

Developing nations argued, at the very least, a COP26 agreement could establish a fund, or "facility" in United Nations jargon, with details to be worked out in the years to come. But in negotiations, the idea ran into a brick wall. Wealthier countries, including the U.S., didn't support it.

Well, what a surprise.

With 2 million people at risk of starvation in Kenya due to an extreme drought this year, Keriako Tobiko of the country's Ministry of Environment and Forestry called the compromise a disappointment.

A disappointment.

As early drafts of the COP26 agreement were released, climate activists were thrilled to see that it urged countries to "accelerate the phasing-out of coal and subsidies for fossil fuels." In negotiations, the U.S. spoke out about ending subsidies for oil and gas at home.

[...]

In later drafts, the language was tweaked to reference phasing out "unabated" coal power and "inefficient" subsidies.

Might as well have dropped it from the agreement altogether.

Developing countries arrived at the Glasgow summit deeply distrustful of a process that has done little, over the decades, to match the urgency of the climate threat--and the damage they're already enduring.

[...]

"How can anyone expect that developing countries can make promises about phasing out fossil fuel and coal subsidies?" said Bhupender Yadav, India's Cabinet Minister for Environment, Forest and Climate Change. "Developing countries still have to deal with their development agenda and poverty eradication."

In a last minute move, India sought to further weaken the wording by changing the "phase-out" of coal to "phase-down." Other countries reluctantly conceded in order to prevent the entire agreement from falling apart.

I get it. I do. It's not fair. But as Rumsfeld might have said, you deal with the climate you have, not with the climate you wish you had. Developing countries won't have to concern themselves with developing and eradicating if they don't have a fucking planet to develop on.

"It hurts deeply to see that bright spot dim," said Stege of the Marshall Islands. "We accept this change with the greatest reluctance. We do so only, and I really want to stress only, because there are critical elements of this package that people in my country need as a lifeline for their future."

A logical and realistic position.

Twelve years ago, wealthier countries like the U.S. promised to provide $100 billion in "climate finance" — funding to help vulnerable nations reduce their emissions with renewable energy, cleaner transportation and other projects. The money is also earmarked for adaptation projects to help communities protect themselves from climate impacts like storms and sea level rise.

By 2020, richer nations pledged to provide that amount annually through both government and the private sector, but so far, have fallen short of that goal. In 2019, countries hit about $80 billion in climate finance. Much of that funding came in the form of loans, instead of grants, which developing countries say further strains their climate efforts as they struggle to repay them.

Surely they didn't really expect anything better.

The U.S., Japan, Norway, Sweden and others announced new climate finance pledges this year, but the $100 billion goal is still elusive and likely won't be met until 2022 or 2023. That amount is also far below the need. A U.N. report estimates that funding for climate adaptation should be five to 10 times greater than what's being spent now.

Not gonna happen.

In the final compromise, countries agreed to begin a two-year work plan ending in 2024 to settle on how climate finance will ramp up to meet the needs of the most vulnerable nations in the future.

In other words, they agreed to talk about it some more.

The rich have already decided that we're beyond the point of saving the planet, and they're interested in just one thing: amassing as much wealth as possible in its last days. They figure their money will provide them the best that's available all the way to the end. And they're right. They're not good. But they're right.

...and hey, do what you want...you will anyway.