COP27: Some welcome climate summit results, others fear not enough has been achieved

For the first time, the peoples of the world have decided to help pay for the damage that an overheating world is doing to poor countries.

But on Sunday, they ended the COP27 marathon climate talks without addressing the root cause of these disasters, the burning of fossil fuels.

The deal establishes a fund for what negotiators call loss and damage.

This is a big win for poorer countries that have long been crying out for cash because they are often victims of floods, droughts, heat waves, famines and storms exacerbated by climate change, despite contributing little to the pollution that warms the globe. . .

It has also long been referred to as a matter of fairness for countries affected by extreme weather events and small island states facing an existential threat from rising sea levels.

“Three long decades and we have finally achieved climate justice,” he said. Sev PaeniFinance Minister of Tuvalu.

Pakistan Environment Minister, Sherry Rehmansaid the creation of the foundation “is not about giving out charity.”

“This is clearly a down payment for a longer investment in our future together,” she said, speaking on behalf of the coalition of the world’s poorest countries.

In June, Pakistan experienced the worst monsoonal floods on record, partly caused by melting glaciers.

Molvin Joseph of Antigua and Barbuda, who chairs the Organization of Small Island States, called the agreement “a victory for our entire world.”

“We showed those who felt left out that we hear you, we see you and show you the respect and care you deserve,” he said.

The deal followed a game of climate change instead of fossil fuels.

Early Sunday morning in Sharm el-Sheikh, delegates approved a compensation fund but did not address contentious issues relating to an overall temperature goal, emission reductions and a drive to phase out all fossil fuels.

In the wee hours, the European Union and other countries resisted what they saw as a backsliding on the Egyptian president’s comprehensive cover-up deal and threatened to derail the rest of the process.

The package was revised again, removing most of the elements the Europeans had objected to, but adding none of the heightened ambition they had hoped for.

“What we have ahead of us is not enough progress for people and the planet,” a frustrated Frans Timmermans, the European Union’s executive vice president, told his negotiating colleagues. “It does not require enough additional effort from major emitters to increase and accelerate emission reductions.

“We have all failed in actions to avoid and minimize loss and damage,” Timmermans said. “We should have done a lot more.”

German Foreign Minister Annalena Berbock also expressed disappointment.

“It is more than disappointing that overdue mitigation and fossil energy phase-out steps are being blocked by a number of major oil issuers and producers,” she said.

The agreement includes a veiled reference to the benefits of natural gas as a low-emission energy source, despite many countries calling for the phasing out of natural gas, which does contribute to climate change.

While the new agreement does not call for emission reductions, it retains language that supports the global goal of limiting warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius.

The Egyptian Presidency continued to offer proposals dating back to the 2015 Parisian, which also mentioned a looser goal of two degrees. The world has already warmed 1.1 degrees since pre-industrial times.

The agreement also does not cover last year’s call to phase out global use of “relentless coal,” even as India and others pushed for oil and natural gas to be included in Glasgow’s wording. This, too, was the subject of last-minute controversy, especially upsetting the Europeans.

The president of last year’s climate talks chided the summit’s leadership for frustrating its efforts to do more to cut emissions by putting together a credible list of what hasn’t been done.

“We have teamed up with many parties to propose a set of measures to help these emissions peak before 2025, as the science tells us it is needed. Not in this text,” said Alok Sharma from the United Kingdom, emphasizing the last part.

“Clear implementation of the phase-out of coal. Not in this text. A clear commitment to phase out all fossil fuels. Not in this text. And the energy text has weakened in the last minutes.”

And in a speech to the negotiators, Grenada-born UN climate chief Simon Steele called on the world to “move away from fossil fuels, including coal, oil and gas.”

However, this fight was marred by a historic compensation fund.

“There are a lot of positive things to celebrate amid the gloom and doom,” not cutting emissions fast enough to limit warming to 1.5 degrees, said climatologist Maarten van Aelst of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Climate Center, which responds to climate disasters.

This is a reflection of what can be done when the poorest countries stay united,” said Alex Scott, climate diplomacy expert at the E3G think tank.

But, as with all climate finance, it’s one thing to set up a fund and another to keep money flowing in and out, she said. The developed world has yet to deliver on its 2009 pledge to spend 95 billion euros a year on other climate change assistance to help poor countries develop clean energy and adapt to future warming.

And there are reports that fossil fuel lobbyists have leaned heavily on African states, both to gain access to the Sharm el-Sheikh summit and to soften commitments to tackle the fossil fuel problem.

Martin Kaiser, head of Greenpeace Germany, described the loss and damage agreement as “a small band-aid on a huge gaping wound”.

“It’s a scandal that the Egyptian COP presidency has given petrostates like Saudi Arabia the space to torpedo effective climate protection,” he said.

Many climate campaigners are concerned that pushing for decisive action to end fossil fuel use will be even more difficult at next year’s meeting in Dubai, in the oil-rich United Arab Emirates.