Proposed climate summit text described as a ‘catastrophe’ and ‘severely flawed’
Register for free to read more of the latest local news. It's easy and will only take a moment.
Climate groups and a UK-based charity have labelled the proposed final agreement from the Cop28 UN Climate Summit a “catastrophe” and “severely flawed”.
The final agreement proposed on Wednesday, after the Dubai summit was scheduled to finish, calls for the world to wean itself off planet-warming fossil fuels, but it stops short of calling for them to be phased out.
Instead, the text calls for “transitioning away from fossil fuels in energy systems, in a just, orderly and equitable manner, accelerating action in this critical decade”.
The word “oil” does not feature in the 21-page document which mentions “fossil fuels” twice.
If Antonio Guterres said we’re on the highway to hell, then wealthy countries like the UK are about to press their foot on the accelerator.
Zahra Hdidou, senior climate and resilience adviser for ActionAid UK which works with some of the world’s poorest women, said if the text is agreed by all 198 countries on Wednesday, it would be “a catastrophe for many climate-stricken communities in the Global South and a shocking abdication of duty from major polluters”.
She said: “While there was encouraging language on ‘transitioning away’ from fossil fuels, this is undermined by vague timelines and empty promises.
“If Antonio Guterres (UN Secretary-General) said we’re on the highway to hell, then wealthy countries like the UK are about to press their foot on the accelerator. But we won’t go quietly.”
Ms Hdidou said hope the talks would lead to ground-breaking commitments to phase out fossil fuels had not been fulfilled.
“Even after hearing of the ‘death sentence’ facing climate-affected countries, major polluters remain tin-eared – all because they remain unwilling to budge an inch to fund a fossil fuel phaseout,” she said.
“Rich countries are failing to live up to bold global ambitions on fossil fuels, but there’s still time in the coming hours to steer the ship away from danger as countries negotiate a final agreement.”
Some of the language in previous versions that most upset nations calling for dramatic action to address climate change was altered.
Actions previously presented as an optional “could” changed to a bit more directing “calls on parties to”.
Jean Su, energy justice director at the Centre for Biological Diversity, said forcing countries to deal with fossil fuels was a “general win” but the details were “severely flawed”.
She said: “The problem with the text is that it still includes cavernous loopholes that allow the United States and other fossil fuel producing countries to keep going on their expansion of fossil fuels.
“There’s a pretty deadly, fatal flaw in the text, which allows for transitional fuels to continue which is a code word for natural gas that also emits carbon pollution.”
Meanwhile, World Resources Institute global climate programme director Melanie Robinson praised the plan, saying it would “dramatically move the needle in the fight against climate change and overcome immense pressure from oil and gas interests”.
