A Glasgow explainer: Decoding the climate jargon
The Glasgow conference comes at the time the IPCC has warned countries that the conference could be the last opportunity to enhance emission control measures to keep the temperature below a 1.5 degree Celsius rise from the pre-industrial level by the turn of the century
New Delhi: The Conference of Parties to United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), called COP, meets annually to review the work under the convention and come with new guidelines to save the world from vagaries of climate crisis. The first COP was held in Berlin in 1995. COP21 in Paris was a key milestone. And from October 31, the world will meet in Glasgow for COP 26.
The Glasgow conference comes at the time the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has warned countries that the conference could be the last opportunity to enhance emission control measures to keep the temperature below a 1.5 degree Celsius rise from the pre-industrial level by the turn of the century. At the present rate, a United Nations Environment Programme report released on Tuesday said that the temperature will increase to 2.7 degree Celsius, much beyond the threshold to control devastating impacts of the climate crisis on people and livelihoods.
Over 100 head of states, including India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi, United States President Joe Biden, and United Kingdom Prime Minister Boris Johnson would be there at Glasgow at the inaugural to provide insights for discussions at the conference and declare their enhanced commitments, called Nationally Determined Contributions or NDCs.
PM Modi has repeatedly spoken of how countries cannot fight the climate crisis without climate justice to most vulnerable and deprived people of the world. Climate justice also means that right of the developing world to economically and socially grow cannot be taken away in the name of climate mitigation.
Before the Glasgow conference, G20 leaders will meet in Rome on October 30 and 31, where net-zero emissions by 2050 and enhancing climate finance are on the agenda. The G20 meeting will set the tone for Glasgow meeting.
Here is an explainer on Glasgow conference and its relevance:
The cost of the climate crisis
From floods and fires to conflict and migration, economic models struggle with the many possible knock-on effects from global warming.
The ballpark International Monetary Fund (IMF) estimate is that unchecked warming will shave 7% off world output by 2100. The Network for Greening the Financial System (NFGS) group of world central banks puts it at an even higher figure of 13%. The NFGS report projects overall output losses of above 15% for much of Asia and Africa, rising to 20% in the Sahel countries. A World Bank paper in 2020 said the climate crisis will drive up to 132 million more people into extreme poverty by 2030 due to loss in farming income; lower outdoor labour productivity; rising food prices; increased disease; and economic losses from extreme weather. A World Meteorological Organisation report on October 26 said India lost $87 billion in 2020 due to disasters such as cyclones, floods and droughts, second to China, which lost $238 billion.
Emissions reduction
Six years ago in Paris, countries agreed to cut greenhouse gas emissions to limit global warming to a rise of 2 degrees Celsius, but preferably to 1.5C. To do this, emissions need to be cut in half by 2030 and reach net-zero by around mid-century. At Glasgow, countries are expected to make steeper emissions cut pledges, called nationally determined contributions (NDCs).
A UN analysis of new or revised NDCs submitted at the end of September found that by 2030, 143 countries would together lower their emissions by 9% from 2010 levels. But the available NDCs of all 191 parties of the Paris Agreement combined equate to a 16% increase in greenhouse gas emissions in 2030 compared to 2010, it said. Some 71 countries have communicated carbon neutrality or net zero by 2050. A UN report released on October 25 said that with this, the total greenhouse gas emission level could be 83–88% lower in 2050 than in 2019. However, these commitments could lead to temperature rise of about 2.7 degree Celsius by end of the century.
China, India, Saudi Arabia and Turkey - together responsible for around a third of global greenhouse gas emissions - have not yet come forward with strengthened NDCs. India and China are expected to announce enhanced NDCs at the Glasgow summit. India is expected to increase renewable energy target from 175 GW to 450 GW by 2030.
Climate finance
In 2009, developed countries pledged to raise $100 billion a year by 2020 to help developing countries deal with the impacts of the climate crisis. Recent data from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) shows that in 2019, developed nations’ governments raised $79.6 billion for vulnerable countries, up 2% from $78.3 billion in 2018. The finance ministers of rich countries at G20 meeting have now shifted the year to 2023 in a bid to end a possible deadlock at the Glasgow summit.
Climate finance is said to be the biggest stumbling block to take the talks ahead.
While developing countries want $ 100 billion to come from government sources, UNFCCC defines climate finance as money from government, private and alternate sources of financing. Climate finance is needed for mitigation because large-scale investments are required to significantly reduce emissions, and is also needed for adaptation, as significant financial resources are needed to adapt to the adverse effects and reduce the impacts of a changing climate, according to UNFCCC.
In accordance with the principle of “common but differentiated responsibility and respective capabilities” set out in the Convention, developed country are to provide financial resources to assist developing country in implementing the objectives of the UNFCCC. However, under the Paris agreement, the emerging economies have been asked to voluntarily contribute to climate finance.
Disaster compensation
The developing countries are expected to vigorously demand a disaster compensation mechanism called Loss and Damage from the rich countries at the summit. The talk on Loss and Damage has been going on since the Copenhagen climate meeting in 2010 and in 2013 the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage was finalised in the Poland’s capital city. Loss and Damage was also mentioned in the 2015 Paris agreement. In 2019, a platform to enable technical assistance for vulnerable countries to evaluate the damage was established.
How the compensation should be evaluated is still on the table and will be discussed at Glasgow. The rich nations have been diluting the issue by saying that evaluation of the damage due to the climate crisis is not possible. They have proposed an insurance based compensation mechanism, which has not been agreed by the developing block. The London School of Economics in a paper said that loss and damage compensation mechanism can cover after “optimum adaptation” has been implemented. Money for adaptation has to be provided by rich nations.
Fossil fuel and coal
COP26 president, Alok Sharma, has said he wants this conference to be the one where coal power is consigned to history. More and more western countries are demanding deadlines for phasing out coal and pressure is increasing in countries such as India to declare a year for phasing out coal. However, a recent study by United Nations showed that India’s dependence on coal was increasing. While China has declared that it will phase out coal by 2040, India says it needs coal (fuel of poor) to ensure energy to all.
The UN has called for phasing out coal by 2030 in OECD countries but environment ministers from G20 economies have failed to agree a timeline. A report by a think tank, Carbon Tracker, in September, estimated that over $1 trillion of business-as-usual investment by the oil and gas sector would no longer be viable in a genuinely low-carbon world. Moreover, the IMF has called for the end of all fossil fuel subsidies - which it calculates at $5 trillion annually if defined to include undercharging for supply, environmental and health costs.
Carbon markets
Carbon markets, a mechanism to trade carbon credits, has been defined under Article 6 of the Paris agreement. A carbon credit is equal to a tonne of carbon saved from emission. The article calls for “robust accounting” to avoid “double counting” of emissions reductions. It also aims to establish a central UN mechanism to trade carbon credits from emissions reductions generated from low-carbon projects.
However, countries have not been able to agree on a mechanism to have an international market on carbon credit trade. Progress on it broke down at the last talks in 2019. The developing world, including India, has opposed the concept of carbon trading, as it fears that bunker fuels, which include aviation and ships, would be included, hampering key sectors in the country. A carbon trade mechanism was in force till 2012 under Kyoto Protocol.
Rich countries argue that tax or permit schemes that try to price in the damage done by emissions create incentives to go green. So far only a fifth of global carbon emissions are covered by such programmes, pricing carbon on average at a mere $3 a tonne. That’s well below the $75/tonne the IMF says is needed to cap global warming at well below 2°C.
Equity and climate justice
Developing countries have been calling for equity and climate justice, saying that rich nations with high carbon footprint (per capita carbon emission) should bear the burden of emission reduction and pay for controlling emissions in the developing world. Before the Glasgow conference, the block of Like Minded Countries had issued a statement saying that rich nations need to enhance their emission reduction targets and have an equitable climate mitigation mechanism. “Major developed countries are now pushing to shift the goal posts of the Paris Agreement from what have already been agreed by calling for all countries to adopt net zero targets by 2050,” a statement by Like Minded Countries said. Countries such my India say they are responsible for very less of the global CO2 emissions and any global climate deal should do justice with a large population, which is relatively poor and deprived of basic facilities, needs economic growth, and must not be penalised for the historical errors of the advanced economies.
(With inputs from Reuters)
Continue reading with HT Premium Subscription
