[Gaurav Saini]
NEW DELHI, 7 Sep: As leaders gather for G20 summit in New Delhi, experts on Thursday said securing consensus on multilateral development bank (MDB) reforms and adopting rigorous language regarding the phasing down of unabated fossil fuels could enhance India’s leadership role.
G20 countries – responsible for 85 percent of the world’s GDP and 80 percent of the emissions – failed to reach consensus at the energy and climate ministers’ meetings in July on the phasing down of unabated use of fossil fuels, tripling renewable energy capacity to 11 terawatts by 2030 and providing low-cost financing to developing countries – issues critical to limiting global average temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius.
Despite the complexity of discussions and uncertainties surrounding energy transition and MDB reforms, there is optimism that the summit’s leaders can find a minimum consensus to demonstrate unity.
India hopes to get the governments to agree on a fossil phase down. However, if this doesn’t find place in the final text, there’s a risk of backsliding on the coal phase-down agreed upon at the Bali summit in the previous year.
At the G20 energy ministerial, Saudi Arabia led the opposition to fossil fuel phase-down efforts, while the G7 nations had earlier committed to accelerating the phase-out of fossil fuels.
Sultan Al Jaber, the president of the next UN climate talks, has stressed that the phase-down of fossil fuels is “inevitable” but contingent upon a substantial increase in renewable energy capacity worldwide.
Experts, however, anticipate limited progress on fossil fuel discussions at the G20.
RR Rashmi, distinguished fellow and programme director at The Energy and Resources Institute, said, “On the issue of fossil fuels, it is unlikely that there will be any language additional to what was agreed in Bali due to lack of global advancement and concrete action, despite India’s push on technology, hydrogen, blue economy, and circular economy.”
Indrajit Bose, global policy lead at the Climate Action Network International, a global network of government and non-government environmental organisations, advocated equitable phase-out of all fossil fuels, with developed countries taking more responsibility. Tejal Kanitkar, an associate professor at the National Institute of Advanced Studies in Bengaluru, emphasised that global targets, when applied uniformly without differentiation, disproportionately burden developing countries, especially those experiencing rapid increases in energy demand.
She said that the developing countries should not readily accept any global target unless it is accompanied by a clear commitment to achieving these targets through principles of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities.
Vaibhav Chaturvedi, a fellow at independent think tank Council on Energy, Environment and Water, said: “The debate (on finance) is going in some direction. At the G20 level, it is the first time that countries are talking about MDB reforms in such a detailed and intensive way about operationalisation of climate finance. It means a lot if the countries which have a say in the MDB processes agree to reforms.”
However, he stressed that it would be worrisome if meaningful progress on finance isn’t achieved at the G20, as strong signals are essential for the market to move in the right direction to meet climate targets.
Bose said that a failure to secure an agreement on equitably phasing fossil fuels along with meaningful financing for developing countries for a just transition at the G20 summit could complicate efforts at COP28.
“At the same time, the UN climate talks have 199 countries together. There will be pressure from civil society also. So, it’s a different platform. There might still be a fair chance to push it at COP,” he added.
Developing countries, including Indonesia and South Africa, have objected to the tripling of RE capacity without clarity on finance to achieve this. Bose acknowledged that “developing countries might face challenges in reaching these targets due to the sorry state of climate finance.”
Experts say that the majority of the funding allocated to developing countries to address the effects of climate change and achieve their climate objectives is provided in the form of loans or investments, rather than grants, which means countries have to pay it back. This is a problem because the countries that need the money the most can’t afford to pay it back.
During the 2011-’20 period, merely about 5 percent was disbursed as grants, while the remainder constituted loans or equity. Notably, 75 percent of all climate finance throughout the decade centered in North America, Western Europe, East Asia, and the Pacific.
According to data from the Climate Policy Initiative, an independent climate policy organisation headquartered in San Francisco, regions housing the majority of low and middle-income countries received less than 25 percent of climate finance flows.
Chandrabhushan, the president and CEO of the International Forum for Environment, Sustainability & Technology, said: “More finance for developing countries, tripling of renewable energy targets and phasing out of fossil fuels are all interconnected issues and an ambitious announcement on these would be a plus for India’s G20 presidency.”
He, however, said that the convention’s success is denoted only by how much emissions countries are reducing and whether the IPCC goals will be met or not. (PTI)