Weak signals from G20 outcomes do not bode well for this year’s annual climate conference in Dubai
Energy Transition Ministerial, in fact, highlighted the role of fossil fuels in the global energy mix and their importance in the ‘eradication of energy poverty’. Representative photo: iStock The G20 Environment and Climate Sustainability Ministerial Meeting concluded on July 28 2023, in Chennai, without reaching any agreement on key climate issues.
Something as pivotal now as transitioning away from fossil fuels could not be agreed upon. In fact, it does not find any mention in the outcome document of the meeting, except in the Chair’s summary that mentioned the discussions were held on ‘phasing down of unabated fossil fuels’.
Countries also failed to draw consensus on issues like tripling of renewable energy capacity and early global peaking of emissions. This follows the recent disappointments at the Energy Transition Ministerial (ETM) in mid-July that concluded without a joint communique.
ETM also failed to elicit commitments, not only regarding a transition away from fossil fuels but also on setting renewable energy targets like tripling renewable energy capacity by 2030, something that the G7 had already committed to earlier this year. ETM, in fact, highlighted the role of fossil fuels in the global energy mix and their importance in the ‘eradication of energy poverty’.
Also read: Delhi intensifies demolition drive as G20 summit approaches; 3 lakh people affected, say activists
Observers noted that major commitments towards energy transition were opposed by countries including China, Saudi Arabia and Russia. British newspaper, The Financial Times quoted a person describing the Chinese negotiator at ETM as a ‘one-man wrecking ball’. Negotiators from the European Union were miffed with the group of countries blocking important discussions.
These disruptions unravel a new challenge. This could be taken as a signal that, in addition to tackling historically uncooperative countries in climate talks like the US and Japan, countries also need to consider some emerging countries, particularly petro-states and large industrial powers like China, Saudi Arabia and Russia, which may be goaded by self-interest to obstruct climate talks.
This development occurred amid July heading towards the dubious distinction of becoming the hottest month ever recorded and the world experiencing an unprecedented surge in extreme weather events. Though the distressing circumstances create an alarming context for climate negotiations, the climate talks have been mired in geopolitics and parochial interests.
The G20 countries comprise 60 per cent of the world population and combinedly contribute to over three-quarters of annual global greenhouse gas emissions.
Since the signing of the Paris climate agreement in 2015, G20 countries have disbursed about $3.3 trillion as subsidies for fossil fuels until 2021, said a Bloomberg Report. In the backdrop of the Ukraine crisis, subsidies hit $1.1 trillion mark for 52 countries, as reported by the International Energy Agency.
A graph showing per capita emission of G20 countries. Source: CSE.
The climate ministerial meeting lacked clarity on its mandate to address energy issues, as it referenced the presence of a distinct energy transition working group. Given how crucial energy discussions are to climate, this uncertainty made it appear that environment and climate ministers lack clear mandates to authoritatively discuss climate on behalf of their respective governments.
The outcomes of the climate document might appear as a promising array of new commitments for those unfamiliar with the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change process and climate negotiations. However, the results merely echo previous pledges.
The discussion outcomes fell short of emphasising the urgent need to ramp up demands for climate finance, the very foundation of contemporary climate discussions. Rather than firmly advocating for increased financial commitments, the outcomes only mildly reaffirmed existing finance goals.
On the first Global Stocktake of the Paris goals, countries committed to a decision/declaration at COP28 later this year that will further ambition on mitigation, adaptation and means of implementation.
Besides, the ministerial stressed the importance of carbon markets based on Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, seen by some as having the force to enhance climate action, especially in the developing world.
Despite ETM’s failure to establish a comprehensive framework for energy transition, the outcome document proposes the adoption of capital-intensive technologies such as bioenergy with carbon capture and storage, direct air capture and small modular reactors. However, a significant concern arises as these suggestions seem to assume that such technologies are universally applicable and equally viable for all countries.
Along similar lines, some parties in the climate ministerial stated that both emission reductions and removals are important for achieving the temperature goal of the Paris Agreement.
With very little on climate beyond banal references to commitments on the Paris Agreement, the outcomes of the conference appeared scattered, as they veered off into various other important and tangentially related themes, such as land degradation, biodiversity, blue economy, circular economy, plastics and water management.
Avantika Goswami, Programme Manager, Climate Change at Delhi-based think tank Centre for Science and Environment, said:
The evidence is clear that we have little time left to decisively act on the climate crisis. Extreme weather events are breaking records, and this is the year that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Sixth Assessment Cycle has concluded. There is also ample and clear direction on what actions must be taken. The lack of a coherent and ambitious vision from the world’s most decisive economies produces weak and confusing signals for what COP28 should achieve in Dubai this year.
There are already murmurs that COP28 Presidency has not been able to lead with a clear mandate for what the climate summit will achieve. The G20’s ambiguity does not make their job easier, she said.
If ministerial platforms are unable to produce substantial outcomes and lack the mandate to discuss key issues, they represent a colossal waste of time and resources.
We are a voice to you; you have been a support to us. Together we build journalism that is independent, credible and fearless. You can further help us by making a donation. This will mean a lot for our ability to bring you news, perspectives and analysis from the ground so that we can make change together.
.png)
Comments are moderated and will be published only after the site moderator’s approval. Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name. Selected comments may also be used in the ‘Letters’ section of the Down To Earth print edition.