{"id":81246,"date":"2023-12-14T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2023-12-14T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/enterpriseam.com\/climate\/2023\/12\/14\/cop28s-adopted-text-sees-nations-agreeing-to-transition-away-from-fossil-fuels-instead-of-phase-out\/"},"modified":"2023-12-14T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2023-12-14T00:00:00","slug":"cop28s-adopted-text-sees-nations-agreeing-to-transition-away-from-fossil-fuels-instead-of-phase-out","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/enterpriseam.com\/climate\/2023\/12\/14\/cop28s-adopted-text-sees-nations-agreeing-to-transition-away-from-fossil-fuels-instead-of-phase-out\/","title":{"rendered":"COP28\u2019s adopted text sees nations agreeing to \u201ctransition away\u201d from fossil fuels instead of phase out"},"content":{"rendered":"

AND IT\u2019S A WRAP- COP28\u2019s revised draft passes:<\/strong> Following two weeks of negotiations that ran into overtime, the representatives of the 198 participating countries at COP28 signed the final document of the Global Stocktake (pdf)<\/a> yesterday morning shortly after we hit send on our last issue, according to a statement<\/a>. The final document underwent several changes in wording and targets, so let\u2019s unpack what the revisions mean. <\/p>\n

The approved text to the \u201cbeginning of the end\u201d: <\/strong>The final agreement marks the first time in the summit's history to see fossil fuels directly addressed in the final text. The revised text called for \u201ctransitioning away from fossil fuels in energy systems, in a just, orderly and equitable manner,\u201d which was hailed as \u201cthe beginning of the post-fossil era,\u201d the EU chief Ursula von der Leyen said<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Not a phase out, but<\/strong>a transition<\/strong>: <\/strong>Despite sidestepping a total phase out \u2014 which over 100 countries<\/a> had been rallying for \u2014 the final text was able to drop the optional language<\/a> of suggested changes, but it came at the expense<\/a> of a more diluted version calling on \u201ctransitioning away\u201d from fossil fuels. The text also called for the phase out of \u201cinefficient fossil fuel subsidies that do not address energy poverty or just transitions, as soon as possible.\u201d <\/p>\n

Coal is here to stay:<\/strong> While the text kept the phasedown of coal<\/a> as a goal, the adopted agreement skipped out on a date to achieve this phasedown or specific targets as to how this phasedown could come about. It also left a caveat for new coal-power generation projects.<\/p>\n

But we have a more defined goal for methane: <\/strong>The text called for \u201caccelerating and reducing\u201d methane emissions by 2030 without stating by how much. This current goal<\/a> is a slight regression from the goals in the previous drafts that called for reducing methane by 30% by 2030 and by 40% by 2035.<\/p>\n

A sneaky last minute addition didn\u2019t go unnoticed: <\/strong>A new provision \u2014 which had not appeared in any of the previous drafts \u2014 disclosed that \u201ctransitional fuels can play a role in facilitating the energy transition,\u201d giving a green light to natural gas expansion, despite its damaging environmental impacts<\/a> that some studies have identified can be as harmful as coal<\/a>. <\/p>\n

Loopholes upon loopholes:<\/strong> Critics view the new provision \u2014 together with the call to accelerate carbon capture \u2014 as evidence of \u201cthe influence of petrostates in the half measures and loopholes included in the final agreement,\u201d US vice president Al Gore said<\/a>. \u201cThe resolution is marred by loopholes that offer the fossil fuel industry numerous escape routes, relying on unproven, unsafe technologies,\u201d the Climate Action Network<\/a> had echoed the sentiment.<\/p>\n

OVER ON THE FINANCE FRONT-<\/strong><\/p>\n

Loss and damage is now a matter of finance: <\/strong>The now operational<\/a> Loss and Damage Fund was moved<\/a> to the section under finance, where other climate finance mechanisms and funds are mentioned. Despite the significant official recognition of the fund as a means of finance, the section of the fund did not address the developed countries obligations nor the scale of the required loss and damage which is estimated to be over USD 400 bn annually<\/a>. The section also did not refer to prioritizing funding for local communities, nor did it mention human rights, gender-responsiveness, the rights of Indigenous Peoples, youth and children.<\/p>\n

The financing provisions fall short: <\/strong>The text\u2019s stance on climate finance is \u201cworrying\u201d as it fell short of demanding developed countries commit to \u201cprovide public, new and additional, grant-based concessional finance,\u201d ACT Alliance Climate Justice lead Julius Mbatia said<\/a>, referring to the text\u2019s exclusion of language that places responsibility on developed countries. The adopted text also excluded two paragraphs<\/a> in previous drafts on \u201ctaking into account the priorities and needs\u201d of vulnerable countries and ensuring that all finance flows are in line with the Paris Agreements. \u201cThe missing element, however, was a clear financial package for countries embarking on their energy transition as well as clarity about how to fill the adaptation finance gap,\u201d E3G Senior Policy Advisor Laura Reyes said<\/a>. <\/p>\n

IN SUMMARY-<\/strong><\/p>\n

Here are the eight actions the text put forward to keep the 1.5C goal alive: <\/strong><\/p>\n