Climate conference in Dubai: COP 28 finds compromise on fossil energies

After all, it was a little less than 24 hours late that Wednesday marked the 28th. UN climate conference in Dubai (COP 28) ended with the adoption of the “UAE Consensus”. The abbreviation refers to the English name for the United Arab Emirates, the host country of the conference. COP 28 President Sultan Ahmed Al-Jaber emphasized at the closing plenary that for the first time a final text the words “fossil energies” contain. In the long history of climate conferences, it has actually not been possible to name the main reason for the sharp increase in greenhouse gas emissions and the resulting global warming. Only “coal” made it into the final text in Glasgow two years ago, while oil and gas remained unmentioned.

However, the “UAE Consensus” does not oblige countries to phase out the burning of fossil fuels, which many countries and the climate movement had pushed for. The unanimously approved document “calls on countries to contribute to the global effort” to put the world on a 1.5 degree path. The text also says what this means: global emissions must peak before 2025 and fall by 43 percent by 2030 compared to 2019. The text then lists a series of eight measures in total that countries should take to contribute to this. One of them is “the transition away from fossil fuels in the energy systems”. This somewhat cumbersome formulation was necessary to achieve a consensus that both progressive states and oil and gas exporting countries could support. In the first draft, which met with indignation or bewilderment among many participants, there was only nebulous talk of reduction.

The measures mentioned in the “UAE Consensus” also include a tripling of renewable capacity, a doubling of the rate of improvement in energy efficiency and a “substantial” reduction in methane emissions by 2030. Controversial options for their implementation are also mentioned. These include the use of fossil gas as a temporary solution, nuclear power and CCS technology to capture and store CO₂.

Several environmental organizations nevertheless praised the “UAE consensus” as “the beginning of the end of the fossil era.” At the same time, there was criticism of the mention of gas and especially CCS. Linda Kalcher, head of the pan-European think tank Strategic Perspectives, is nevertheless optimistic: “Economic realities will undo some of the false solutions that are still contained in this text.”

The harshest criticism came from representatives of small island states. They also felt taken by surprise when the final declaration was presented and accepted. German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock said: “We see you and feel for your children, for whom the text cannot be enough.” And then she emphasized that the UEA consensus was only “a starting point.”

The latter is a truism with regard to climate diplomacy, because what matters is not the adoption of a – ultimately non-binding – text, but rather its implementation. But it is also a reference to the further procedure, as regulated in the Paris Climate Agreement: The countries must submit new climate targets for 2035 by the beginning of 2025, which are based not least on the UAE consensus.

In the future, these national plans should also contain targets for adaptation to warming. The chapter on this topic in the “UAE Consensus” received mixed reactions: “Originally, adaptation to climate change was a marginal issue, but it ended up playing a key role in the results of COP 28,” said Ana Mulio Alvarez from the British environmental think tank E3G. But it can only “mark the beginning of a coordinated global effort for adaptation and resilience.” Rixa Black from the German environmental organization Germanwatch However, criticized that there was not enough money available for this effort for the global south. The agreed measures are therefore “too weak”.

There was also criticism of the passages on climate finance in general. Most discussions about this have been postponed until next year, when the industrialized countries want to reveal what will happen with the $100 billion in climate aid promised annually from 2025. However, the climate conferences are now far less important for many financial flows than the behavior of international development banks. The “UAE Consensus” therefore only underlines “the importance of reforming the multilateral financial architecture, including the multilateral development banks.” Another dampener on financial issues was the reluctance of states with high per capita emissions, such as Saudi Arabia, which are still officially classified as developing countries in the UN. After the Emirates pledged $100 million to the new loss and damage fund, there was hope that others would follow suit, but that has not happened.

There was ultimately praise from NGOs for a line of negotiations that once again remained unsuccessful. These are rules for trading certificates that are intended to enable the transfer of emission reductions from one country to another country. “The lack of an agreement prevents the mistakes of the voluntary carbon market from being repeated,” said Gilles Dufrasne of Carbon Market Watch. »As the numerous scandals surrounding this market in the last twelve months have shown, trading in certificates requires strict environmental and human rights regulations.«