COP 28: why the agreement is called"historical"

COP 28 why the agreement is calledquothistoricalquot

After a night of debate, the delegates of the States present at COP 28 ended up adopting the decision prepared by the United Arab Emirates, triggering thunderous applause. The text, every word of which was negotiated by the Emiratis, calls for “transitioning away from fossil fuels in energy systems, in a fair, orderly and equitable manner, accelerating action in this crucial decade, in order to achieve carbon neutrality in 2050 in accordance with scientific recommendations. The call to accelerate action this decade was a demand from the European Union and many other countries.

By choosing the term “transitioning away” (“transitioning out of”, “moving away” or “abandoning” gradually, depending on the possible translations into French), the text no longer speaks of “phase-out” (“exit” ) oil, gas and coal, a term that has for months become the banner behind which more than a hundred countries and thousands of NGOs have lined up. Until today, only the “reduction” of coal had been recorded at COP 26 in Glasgow. Oil and gas had never been designated.

In the draft agreement of the Emirates there is a recognition of the role played by “transitional energies”, referring to natural gas, in ensuring the “energy security” of developing countries, where nearly 800 million people lack access to electricity.

Triple renewable energy capacity

The text also contains multiple calls related to energy: tripling renewable energy capacities and doubling the rate of improvement in energy efficiency by 2030. But further accelerating “zero carbon” and “low carbon” technologies. carbon”, including nuclear power, low-carbon hydrogen, and the nascent carbon capture and storage, defended by oil-producing countries to be able to continue pumping hydrocarbons.

The first draft of the Emirati text, on Monday, sparked an outcry because it listed too many options to choose from and did not call for an “exit” from fossil fuels, the combustion of which since the 19th century is largely responsible for the rise current global temperatures of 1.2°C, compared to the pre-industrial era. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Iraq took a hard line, refusing any agreement attacking the fossil fuels that make them rich. But they ultimately did not block an agreement, which was quickly singled out by countries, experts and NGOs for the relative weakness of its vocabulary and certain points remaining unclear.

lep-general-02