COP Pledges
By Shivaji Sarkar
The climate summit COP26 is galore of promises as desertification the world over increases. The meet is less on concrete terms to bring down temperature but high on verbose. It’s a ‘failure”, is how youth activist Greta Thunberg described it during the protest in Glasgow. She termed it as having turned into a “PR event to fight for the status quo,” and comparing it to a “global north greenwash festival.”
On the Indian front, Prime Minister Narendra Modi has struck the right note. He has taken time till 2070 so that India’s development is not smothered by the reticence of the developed world. He says that the commitment to climate has a cost and the rich nations are not meeting out their pledge of providing $100 billion a year to developing nations by 2020, as agreed at the climate conference in Copenhagen in 2009. The target has simply notbeen met yet.
Nations such as Saudi Arabia, Japan and Australia on the other hand are asking the United Nations to play down the need to move rapidly from fossil fuels. The Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) says that 32000 submissions have been made by governments, companies and other interested parties to dilute the issues of fossil fuel.
They are arguing that the world does not need to reduce the use of fossil fuels as quickly as the current draft of the report recommends. A West Asian country’s oil ministry has sought removal of phrases such as the need for urgent and accelerated mitigation actions at all scales. The issue of temperature reduction by 2 degrees widely talked may remain on paper as they press for slower action and cutting temperature limit reduced to 1.5 degrees.
Australia does not accept the conclusion that closing coal-fired thermal power plants are necessary, even though the COP26 objective is to end the use of coal that adds to the problem of greenhouse effect. OPEC also asks the IPCC to delete lobby activism. It would protect rent extracting business models. Saudi Arabia wants deletion of the UN conclusion that the focus of decarbonisation efforts in the energy sector needs to move rapidly to zero-carbon sources and actively phasing out fossil fuels.
Many developing countries are not comfortable with the zero emission. Argentina, Norway and OPEC also challenge the contention. Norway wants the UN scientists to allow the possibility of capture and storage (CCS) as a potential tool for reducing emissions from fossil fuels. Even India had to resort to larger coal prospecting as its power system was reportedly coming to a critical stage and it had to keep the thermal power plants running.
The draft report accepts carbon could play a role in the future but says there are uncertainties about its feasibility. The CCS emerges as a vague term for continuing with the fossil fuel.
In 2015, the Paris Agreement stressed the need for limiting temperature below 2 degree to 1.5 degree celsius before 2100. India and China’s commitment has increased hopes that zero emission is possible by 2070, but that again does not remain a certainty.
Indeed, the globe is warming up faster. Climate change is affecting rainfall patterns and warmer atmosphere can lead to more rainfall in some areas and drought in many others. It is expected to increase global poverty as water in excess or shortage would play havoc with human development.
The global area of dry lands is expected to expand as the climate warms. Various projections on emission scenarios indicate arid lands will increase by 11 to 23 percent compared a 30 year period of 1961 to 1990. This means that dry lands could be 50 to 56 percent of the earth’s land surface, a 38 percent rise, by 2021. The arid regions will expand over southwest of North America, north and south Africa and Australia, the Mediterranean and South America.
Now at Glasgow COP26, Australia and 123 other countries signed an agreement to end deforestation by 2030. There have been many such declarations before. Such policies have to be adopted by different countries at the domestic level. If these are not implemented due to domestic political pressure such declarations would have little impact.
India never reneges on such commitment but there are various lobbies that are on reckless constructions in the Himalayas and other sensitive zones leading to serious crisis. About 97.85 million hectares (29.7 percent) of India’s total geographical area (TGA) of 328.72 mha underwent land degradation during 2018-19. In 2003-05, 94.53 mha (28.76 percent of the TGA) underwent land degradation. The number increased to 96.40 mha (29.32 percent of the TGA) in 2011-13.
About 83.69 mha underwent desertification in 2018-19. This was greater than the 81.48 mha in 2003-2005 and 82.64 mha in 2011-13 that were. India witnessed an increase in desertification in 28 of 31States and Union Territories between 2011-13 and 2018-19.
Forest covers are dwindling all across Asia and various Indian States too are amending their laws for increased “developmental activities” across. Tree felling and water erosion too is causing heavy erosion as construction activities are increasing. The Centre’s commitment and the States’ priorities often clash and the latter play havoc at the ground level.
A McGill paper has found that more airport constructions would have environmental problem, increase warming and other ecological problems. But since these have become symbols of fast development without studies across, India and many other countries construct more airports. Each adds to environmental degeneration. Recently in Uttar Pradesh and the hilly States a number of airports are being constructed for “better” connectivity. Man’s greed cause the Kedarnath tragedy and repeated Himalayan landslides. Unfortunately, there is more propaganda than demonstrative action.
The IPCC says that various climate modelssuggest that rainfallwill be more intense for almost the entire world, potentially increasing the risks of soil erosion. Projections indicate that most of the world will see a 16 to 24 percent increase in heavy precipitation intensity by 2100.
The Director of Research, Grantham Institute at Imperial College, London, Joeri Rogelji, states that pledges at climate meets are not sufficient to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement and COP26 still has an important task. For the temperature control the pledges need to turn to action. But, he says, those pledges do not match the ambitions.
The International Energy Agency is unhappy with what the governments are trying to show. The governments need to have clear and credible policy, it says. Ambitions count for little if these are not implemented successfully. Would COP remain as another paper? — INFA