COP27 & After
By Dhurjati Mukherjee
Umpteen numbers of reports and research studies have come out in recent years regarding the extent of global warming and the disastrous effect of emissions on the climate. Such voluminous documents have possibly not been produced in the last hundred years or so. It is now an established fact that limiting warming to 1.5 C is an impossible task, whatever measures, which appear realistic, are taken. Deliberations, conferences and meetings are being held all across the globe, but the resultant effects are far from encouraging. As every year, the COP27 was held this year too with a lot of hope and aspiration, but experts opined that the new climate agreement had done virtually nothing to address greenhouse gas emissions.
The recently released 2022 Global Carbon Budget report predicted that global carbon emissions in 2022 remain at record levels with no sign of reduction and, if the current levels persist, there is a 50% chance that warming would exceed 1.50C in nine years’ time. But climatologists believe that the chance is around 60%. The report noted that the global fossil CO2 emissions are projected to rise one percent this year, compared to 2021, slightly above the 2019 pre-Covid levels. While fossil fuel emissions are projected to fall in China by 0.9% and the European Union by 0.8%, it is estimated to rise in the US by 1.5% and in India by as much as 6%, the largest single driver of the growth in carbon dioxide globally.
Similar is the observation of the World Meteorological Organization in its State of Global Climate Report 2022 that stated that global mean temperature in 2022 is currently estimated to be about 1.15 (1.02 to 1.280 C) above pre-industrial levels (1850-1900 average) making it rather impossible to meet the goal of keeping warming within 1.50 C goal by the end of the century.
Meanwhile, a section of scientists associated with the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) temperatures to rise by 2-30 C above pre-industrial levels by 2100. Current policies are on track to reduce emissions by 7% compared with 2019 but 43% reduction is needed to limit global warming to 1.50C – the target set by the 2015 Paris Agreement. Many countries have updated targets this year and if they are met, emissions could drop by 4.89 Gt by 2030.
As the projected emissions are still far above the levels required to limit warming to 1.50C, the UNEP countries will have to commit much more ambitious targets to meet the 2030 deadline, which appears quite an impossibility. Even if warming is reduced to below 20C, scientists expects climate change to cut crop yields, make severe droughts and heatwaves more frequent and increase the intensity of natural disasters.
The only redeeming feature is that the COP27 presidency launched the Sharm-el-Shiekh Adaptation Agenda outlining 30 goals to enhance resilience for four billion people living in the most vulnerable communities by 2030. India having vast coastlines and other vulnerable areas will benefit. The presidency sought to mobilize $140 billion to $300 billion through both public and private sources annually to pursue goals, including transitioning to climate resilient, sustainable agriculture that can increase yields by 17% and reduce farm level greenhouse gas emissions by 21% without expanding agricultural frontiers. However, the details of mobilization of funds and their dispersal have not been clearly outlined.
Another significant development is the announcement of the Coalition for Disaster Resilience (CDRD) to set up an infrastructure Resilience Accelerator Fund with $50 million to support global action to build robust infrastructure in developing countries that can withstand impacts of climate change. It will be a multi-donor trust fund, managed by the United Nations Multi-Partner Trust Fund Office, New York. This rather small fund is expected to be supported by India, the EU, UK, Australia, the IRAF’s multi-pronged programme and offer customized technical assistance, capacity building, research, knowledge management and advocacy across the infrastructure life cycle for countries at all stages of development.
The requirement of finance for the developing countries is much more and this has been aptly pointed out by India, which took a leading role on behalf of the like-minded developing countries (LMDC) group at the conference. India, while flagging how even the commitment of $100 billion made in 2009 by developed countries was not only miniscule, given the scale of needs, but that too has not been received as yet.
In this connection, it needs to be mentioned that India rightly reminded that “the standing committee of finance had estimated that resources in the range of $6 trillion to $11 trillion are required till 2030 to meet the targets set by developing countries in their NDCs; the lower limit i.e. $6 trillion currently being committed while the upper limit is $11 times”. According to the OECD, hardly $80 billion could be mobilized in 2021. Experts are unanimous in their opinion that rich countries have to start delivering on the $100 billion pledge immediately and also make up for the past shortfalls. But this possibly remains a pious wish at this juncture.
According to available estimates, India needs $2.5 trillion till 2030 for meeting the nationally determined contribution (NDC) commitments. Currently the green finance available in the country represents just 25% of the total required across sectors for mitigation alone. If such finance is not available, India does not have any other option but to support communities from its domestic budget.
Environmentalists are of the opinion that the developed countries who have the highest capability, financially and technologically, to take the lead in reducing emissions, continue to fall short of expectations while continuing to emit and disproportionately consume the global carbon budget. Though the informal draft emphasized on developed countries attaining net-negative carbon emissions by 2030, this remains a dream. Developing countries can enhance mitigation ambition based on the provision of support by developed countries to developing countries. The informal draft also has referred to doubling the adaptation finance to $40 billion a year by 2025, which appears rather impossible given the attitude of the developed nations.
The text of the conference in its conclusion on the mitigation clause (para 28) called upon countries “to accelerate the development, deployment and dissemination of technologies and the adoption of policies to transition towards low-emission energy systems, including by rapidly scaling up the deployment of clean power generation and energy efficiency measures, including accelerating efforts towards the phase down of clean power and phase out of inefficient fossil fuel subsidies.” However, it has not been quite clear about the finance aspect and what the developed world would give to the developing countries as also the modus operandi of transfer of technology.
The only encouraging news is the creation of the ‘loss and damage’ fund that would help poor and vulnerable nations cope with climate disasters worsened by greenhouse gases. Such a financial facility is, no doubt, a breakthrough but the funding would be restricted to only future loss and damage and no historical responsibility by the developed world would be taken for emission rise. However, the statement did not set a deadline for the fund’s operationalization. Indeed, a lot finer tuning is vital. —INFA