Fossil fuels can finally make an entry in climate negotiations

Climate negotiations have focused on greenhouse gas emissions, but never mentioned their main source — fossil fuels. And it is only now that it is being pointed out how untenable this has been.

“Science is clear: we need to phase out fossil fuels within a timeframe compatible with limiting global warming to 1.5 degree Celsius,” UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres said at a roundtable with “non state actors” at the COP28 meeting on Sunday.

He seemed particularly frustrated with a commitment made by about 50 oil and gas companies the previous day to end their methane emissions, caused mainly by leakages, by 2030 and turn net-zero in their operations by 2050. They avoided any mention of cutting down production. The commitment by the companies was one of the several pledges announced on the sidelines of the COP28 meeting on the initiative of hosts UAE which showcased them as breakthroughs and progress towards enhanced climate actions.

Guterres pointed out that the announcement said “nothing about eliminating emissions from fossil fuels consumption”. “In addition, yesterday’s (Saturday’s) announcement provided no clarity on the pathway to reaching net zero by 2050, which is absolutely essential to ensure integrity – and integrity matters… So, there must be no room for greenwashing. And this also applies to what has been announced yesterday,” he said.

Fossil fuels — oil, gas, coal and their derivatives — account for at least 80 per cent of all greenhouse gas emissions. There is no way the emissions can be reduced without substantially cutting down on the usage of these fuels. However, that is exactly what the world, mainly the influential countries, have been attempting to do — aiming to cut emissions without touching its source. As such, none of the climate targets have ever been achieved. And the current targets also seem way beyond reach right now.

All the current climate actions being taken by the countries is estimated to bring down annual emissions by just 2 per cent from 2019 levels by 2030, according to latest projections. Science says it must be at least 43 per cent to entertain any hopes of keeping global temperature rise within 1.5 degree Celsius from pre-industrial averages.

Interestingly, it was India which set the cat among the pigeons at the COP27 meeting in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, last year by calling for a phase-out of fossil fuels to be included in the final outcome of the meeting. India, of course, was trying to turn the tables on the western countries after it was stung by the inclusion of coal in the final outcome of COP26 in Glasgow. It was a vague mention — calling for a phase-down of coal — without any specifics, but it was the first time that any fossil fuel had ever been mentioned in an official COP decision. India fought to get the word ‘phase-out’ changed to ‘phase-down’, with the tacit support of many other powerful countries, including the United States and China, both big consumers of coal, just like India. It is still not clear what the two terms ‘phase-out’ or ‘phase-down’ mean in practical terms.

At COP27 last year, India argued against the singling out of coal, and called for the phase-down of all fossil fuels. After initial hesitation, both the European Union and the United States, two of the most influential developed country players in these talks, agreed to back the proposal. But it eventually got torpedoed in behind the scenes negotiations. India is not looking to proactively raise the issue again this year.

But voices for a fossil fuel phase-out have grown louder, particularly with UAE hosting the COP this year. UAE’s decision to pick its Industry Minister Sultan Al Jaber to preside over the two-week conference invited sharp criticism. Al Jaber, besides being the Minister for Industry and Advanced Technology, also happens to be the CEO of the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company, the world’s 12th largest oil company by production. His appointment as COP28 president was seen as a clear conflict of interest, and an invitation to the fossil fuel industry to influence the negotiations. Just two days ahead of COP28, Al Jaber was accused of using his position as COP28 president to further the interests of his oil companies during his talks with governments across the world in the last one year.

Al Jaber, of course, has denied the accusations, and sought to allay the concerns by pointing out that he also happened to be the chairman of Masdar, a state-owned renewable energy company with an enviable track record.

But on Sunday he created another furore by suggesting that phase-out of fossil fuels was not essential for achieving the 1.5 degree Celsius target.

“There is no science out there, or no scenario out there, that says that phase-out of fossil fuel is what is going to achieve the 1.5 (degree Celsius target). 1.5 is my northstar. And a phase down or phase out of fossil fuel, in my view, is inevitable, it is essential, but we need to be real, serious and pragmatic about it,” Al Jaber said in a television interview.

“Please show me a road map for a phase-out of fossil fuel that will allow for sustainable socio-economic development, unless you want to take the world back into caves,” he said.

His comments drew sharp reactions from many scientific activists and scientists. Jean Pascal van Ypersele, a professor of climatology and a former vice-chairman of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued an angry letter Al Jaber on behalf of a group of other scientists, reminding him that humanity needed to agree on the phase-out of all fossil fuels by 2050 and on stopping net deforestation at the same time.

“The climate system does not do politics. It does not play with words. It only understands real emission or absorption of greenhouse gas molecules. Net zero means exactly what those words mean: not a single tonne of CO2 that is not 100 per cent absorbed safely and permanently can be emitted,” he said.

Al Jaber had to issue a clarification later in the day, saying he respected science and asked everyone to judge COP28 on the final outcomes it delivers. He also reiterated that he believed that phase-down and phase-out of all fossil fuels was “inevitable and essential” but the transition needed to be “orderly, fair, just, responsible and well managed”.

The controversy might succeed in forcing a language on fossil fuel phase-down to be included in the negotiating texts at COP28. But the specifics of such a phase-down would most likely be left unclear again, just as in the case of coal.

IPCC’s 2018 report said if global warming had to be restricted to 1.5 degree Celsius with no or little overshoot, fossil fuels would need to be “greatly reduced”, while “unabated coal use” would have to be completely phased out. Specifically, oil would need to be reduced by 60 per cent from 2019 levels, while natural gas would have to come down by at least 45 per cent.