Now that the excitement of delegates and celebrities swarming Glasgow for COP26 has calmed down, it is important to take a look at the impact of the event itself and what commitments were actually agreed to.
Environmental Impacts of Hosting COP in person
The 2021 UN climate summit had a carbon footprint that approximately doubled the last climate summit held in Madrid in 2019 [1], according to a report by the firm Arup.
The summit was estimated to emit 102,500 tons of carbon dioxide. An article from CNBC calculated this to be equivalent to the average annual emissions for over 8,000 U.K. residents [2].
COP25 in Madrid emitted about 51,000 tons of CO2 and COP21 in Paris in 2015 emitted about 43,000 tons. How is it that the Glasgow conference doubled emissions?
Arup estimated that 60% of the emissions are due to international flights alone. Other large contributors were accommodations, event security, and transport between venues.
There was notable outrage at the number of private jets flown into Glasgow and surrounding airports during the conference. Headlines estimated anywhere from 118 to over 600 jets had flown in, carrying less than a handful of delegates each.
It is interesting how citizens are encouraged to take public transport to their jobs, but leaders cannot even figure out how to car-pool to work together in their jets.
The most conservative estimates I could find from Forbes found that the jets landing emitted over 1,800 tons of CO2 [3]. This only includes the jets arriving and only looked at jets landing in Glasgow International Airport, not surrounding airports.
During the conference, Boris Johnson flew to London on a taxpayer funded private jet to have dinner with the former editor of the Daily Telegraph at a men-only club. A spokesperson for the PM deemed it necessary as Johnson needs to be able to travel around the country while facing significant time constraints [4]. Apparently having an overpriced meal at a misogynist institution with a no longer relevant member of the press is deemed to be a key part of his job.
The hypocrisy of a global climate change summit attended by hundreds of private jets is shocking, particularly in a year where regular people have been told how vital it is that we learn how to effectively work from home as it can save lives.
Promises, Promises
Outlined by the BBC, the main (not legally binding) commitments made at this year’s conference were as follows [5]:
Countries will meet next year to pledge more cuts to CO2 emissions to try and keep the temperature rises within 1.5 °C (the 1.5 °C mark was pledged in the 2015 Paris Agreement)
A phasing down of coal use
Wealthier countries pledged to increase money given to poorer countries to help cope with the devastating effects of climate change as well as to increase investment in “clean energy”
Subsidies that artificially lower the price of coal, oil, and natural gas were agreed to be phased out
The US and China (the world’s two biggest CO2 emitters) agreed to cooperate more in the next decade in areas including methane emissions and switching to clean energy
Leaders from over 100 countries that govern 85% of the world’s forests agreed to put a stop to deforestation by 2030
Over 100 countries agreed to cut methane emissions by 30% by 2030
Issues with these commitments
CO2
If the current national pledges made to cut CO2 are met by 2030, global warming will increase by 2.4 °C, well above the “safe” increase of 1.5 °C. Most countries have not implemented policies or legislation to meet their short term goals, meaning they have made no legal commitment [6]. A study commissioned by Oxfam [7] indicated that 16% of total global emissions by 2030 will come from the world’s richest 80 million people. According to their calculations the world’s wealthiest need to cut their emissions by 97% to be able to meet the 1.5 °C warming goal. They may want to start with not taking private jets to climate change conferences.
Coal
The initially proposed plan was to phase coal out completely, but India and China both refused and only agreed once the commitment was brought down to aim for coal reduction. Australia did not sign the final COP26 pact at all so they could avoid changing any of their coal mining targets.
This conference was the first time that coal was explicitly stated to be a major contributor to climate change, and so including it in the agreements is a big win. However, the fact that there were clauses written into the agreement that allow countries to avoid updating or meeting their emission plans depending on “different national circumstances” [8] is problematic. They can easily be used as an excuse to get out of meeting targets.
Additionally, the wealthy and developed nation of Australia blankly stating that coal will be used down under for decades to come [9] as well as refusing to sign the final COP26 pact [10] was a major disappointment.
Money
Wealthy nations pledged to give 1 trillion USD per year to poorer nations starting in 2025. This is interesting as the current goal of giving 100bn USD a year by 2020 still has not been met [11]. Proposals also included requesting a separate stream of financing to deal with direct damage done by climate change. Developing nations are often most directly affected by climate change disasters and account for significantly fewer carbon emissions.
Not surprisingly, the wealthy nations in attendance made sure to remove anything in the proposals that made them legally required to support poorer nations [12]. The climate financing is available to a number of different countries, from the very poorest to those with massive economies like Brazil and China. It is interesting that countries like China are powerful enough to refuse to sign coal agreements until they are watered down so much they are ostensibly meaningless but can also access climate funding and demand that funding be increased.
Subsidies
No dates have been set to begin phasing out subsidies that artificially lower the price of coal, oil, or natural gas. Currently, world governments spend over 420 billion USD annually to subsidize non-renewable energy [13]. What this means is that for every dollar pledged to help developing nations with the climate crisis, four dollars are being given to subsidize companies that contribute to the crisis itself.
US-China Statement
Given how rocky the relationship between the US and China has been recently, the fact that they could jointly express public acknowledgement that there is a crisis and that action is needed is a positive sign. However, there were no firm commitments made and we will all need to keep a close eye to see what both countries do to actually make changes.
Deforestation
Previous plans to stop deforestation (such as the 2014 UN deal to halve deforestation by 2030 [14]) have not worked. Although this deal has more funding than others have had, it does not have any clear statement on how illegal deforestation will be policed or what the repercussions will be [15].
Methane
Methane is estimated to cause about one third of planet warming [16]. Unfortunately, the three biggest emitters (China, Russia, and Iran) refused to join the scheme to reduce methane emissions. Like all the other commitments there were no specifics about how the methane would be reduced or what the repercussions would be if the goal of 30% was not met.
Conclusion
This conference had a direct negative effect on the environment, and no binding agreements were made as a result of it. Hopefully in the future these conferences will be attended virtually and even more importantly there will be direct and immediate financial repercussions for nations (wealthy ones in particular) who refuse to reduce their impact.
REFERENCES
[1] ARUP (2021). COP26 Carbon Management Plan Executive Summary. [online] Available at: https://ukcop26.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Executive-summary-of-our-Carbon-Management-Plan.docx.pdf?referringSource=articleShare [Accessed 29 Nov. 2021].
[2] Newburger, E. (2021). The COP26 conference set a record for CO2 emissions, with air travel the main culprit. [online] CNBC. Available at: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/12/cop26-climate-summit-record-co2-emissions-air-travel-main-culprit.html.
[3] Williams, O.A. (2021). 118 Private Jets Take Leaders To COP26 Climate Summit Burning Over 1,000 Tons Of CO2. [online] Forbes. Available at: https://www.forbes.com/sites/oliverwilliams1/2021/11/05/118-private-jets-take-leaders-to-cop26-climate-summit-burning-over-1000-tons-of-co2/?sh=7eeeef0553d9 [Accessed 29 Nov. 2021].
[4] HeraldScotland. (2021). PM left COP26 on private jet to “attend private dinner with climate sceptic.” [online] Available at: https://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/19693563.cop26-boris-johnson-left-private-jet-attend-men-only-club-dinner/.
[5] COP26: What is the Glasgow climate conference and why is it important? (2021). BBC News. [online] 15 Nov. Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-56901261.
[6] Abnett, K. (2021). World heading for 2.4C of warming after latest climate pledges -analysts. Reuters. [online] 9 Nov. Available at: https://www.reuters.com/business/cop/world-track-24c-global-warming-after-latest-pledges-analysts-2021-11-09/.
[7] Gore, T. (2021). Carbon inequality in 2030. [online] Oxfam International. Available at: https://www.oxfam.org/en/research/carbon-inequality-2030 [Accessed 29 Nov. 2021].
[8] McGrath, M. (2021). COP26: Evasive words and coal compromise, but deal shows progress. BBC News. [online] 13 Nov. Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-59277977.
[9] Mcdonald, J. (2021). Australia Disappoints at COP26. [online] thediplomat.com. Available at: https://thediplomat.com/2021/11/australia-disappoints-at-cop26/ [Accessed 28 Nov. 2021].
[10] Martin, S. (2021). Barnaby Joyce says Nationals did not sign Cop26 pact and Australia is “happy with targets.” [online] the Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/nov/15/scott-morrison-rules-out-more-ambitious-2030-emissions-target-despite-cop26-pact.
[11] Averchenkova, A., Bhattacharya, A., Calland, R., Gonzalez, L., Martinez-Diaz, L. and van Rooij, J. (2020). DELIVERING ON THE $100 BILLION CLIMATE FINANCE COMMITMENT AND TRANSFORMING CLIMATE FINANCE INDEPENDENT EXPERT GROUP ON CLIMATE FINANCE. [online] Available at: https://www.un.org/sites/un2.un.org/files/100_billion_climate_finance_report.pdf.
[12] Morris, C. (2021). COP 26: How much is the developing world getting to fight climate change? BBC News. [online] 14 Nov. Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/57975275.
[13] UNDP. (2021). For every dollar pledged to tackle climate crisis for world’s poor, four dollars are spent on fossil fuel subsidies that keep the climate crisis alive according to new UNDP research | United Nations Development Programme. [online] Available at: https://www.undp.org/press-releases/every-dollar-pledged-tackle-climate-crisis-worlds-poor-four-dollars-are-spent-fossil [Accessed 29 Nov. 2021].
[14] UN News. (2014). Governments, corporations pledge at UN summit to eliminate deforestation by 2030. [online] Available at: https://news.un.org/en/story/2014/09/478312-governments-corporations-pledge-un-summit-eliminate-deforestation-2030.
[15] Deforestation: Which countries are still cutting down trees? (2021). BBC News. [online] 19 Nov. Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/59136545.
[16] COP26: US to tackle methane leaks from oil and gas wells. (2021). BBC News. [online] 2 Nov. Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-59131282 [Accessed 29 Nov. 2021].
留言