COP26. If you are here, reading my blog, I assume you know what it is and maybe you even followed its developments throughout . If you are not so familiar I reccomend you to go to the COP26 website or check this Nature COP26 collection and then come back I don’t really love these ‘cops’. It’s not even that I don’t love it, it’s more that… I find them pointless! What is written on this guardian article explains exactly my feelings about the sort of agreements that are being reched :
‘Observers said the draft [of the outcomes] fell substantially short of what was needed. Jennifer Morgan, the executive director of Greenpeace International, said it was a little more than an agreement to “all cross our fingers and hope for the best”, and said stronger action was needed on finance and adaptation, including “real numbers in the hundreds of billions”. “It’s a polite request that countries maybe, possibly, do more next year,” she said. “That’s not good enough, and the negotiators shouldn’t even think about leaving this city until they’ve agreed to a deal that meets the moment. Because most assuredly, this one does not.’ Let’s have a look at some of the outcomes : Promising to end deforestation by 2030. What does this even mean? There are lots of money being thrown to the table, and they are promising to involve indigenous communities in the safeguarding of forest habitats. But there are still risks for local communities being exploited or under-considered. As Sarobidy Rakotonarivo said ‘If the money is being spent mostly on bureaucracy, then one shouldn’t expect much. Besides, no one seems to know the true costs of ending deforestation. Global environmental policies include a risk of fundamental injustice. If we really want to be effective, we need to recognize that ill-considered policies might make local communities poor.’ Signing the global methane pledge which aims to Cut 30% methane emissions based on 2020 levels by 2030. This could help avoid 0.3° C by 2040, but some big countries appear to be still out of it (if i am wrong please let me know): Russia, China and India.. some pretty big countries! And again: I am really wondering what are they going to prioritise to do that. Would there be more focus on the intensive animal farming? On the better management of wetland ecosystems (carbon sinks but also methane emitters in certain environmental conditions) ? Surprising was the turn around, where china and the usa agreed to cooperate : they are amongst the biggest polluters, so it seems at least like a promising thing. But I wonder if there will be some hidden costs to this alliance… Overall it was said that 2050 was too late, that things should be made more stringent already by 2022, for rich nations to pay poorer nations in climate aids. But (at the time of writing this) is still unclear HOW. There are also question marks over how countries should monitor and report on their emissions, and controversial provisions for countries to use carbon trading or offsetting to help meet this emissions-cutting targets.... Will it work, then? We shall see what actual policies and laws come out of it. For now, is just cash and words. Or to put it in the words of Gutierrez as reported by the Washington Post ‘Promises ring hollow when the fossil fuels industry still receives trillions in subsidies, as measured by the [International Monetary Fund]," he will say. "Or when countries are still building coal plants. Or when carbon is still without a price – distorting markets and investors decisions.”’
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Disclaimer: some posts may contain affiliate links. At no extra costs to you, buying through the link will help me in this blogging journey!
Archives
January 2023
Categories
All
|