Bonn Climate Conference Reveals the Rough Road Towards COP30 in Brazil - Habib Maalouf
Bonn Climate
Conference Reveals the Rough Road Towards COP30 in Brazil By Habib Maalouf
Over two weeks of preparatory meetings in Bonn last June, the participants were unable to pave the way for the thirtieth Conference of the Parties (COP30), which will be held in Belém, Brazil, next November. Those who had some hope for action to prevent the Earth's temperature from rising more than 1.5 degrees Celsius were disappointed after this number was reached in the last two years. Meanwhile, only 10% of countries submitted their nationally determined commitments, after missing the deadline set for last February, indicating a lack of interest in climate change as an existential priority over other serious global issues.
A Stalled
Agenda: Disagreements on Climate Finance and Trade Measures
Taking into
account the United States' withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement and its
absence from the Bonn Conference, as well as recent wars and their (military
and commercial) tragedies and the size of spending on them—which negatively
affects the required climate financing—we can understand the extent of the
challenges facing this issue. Although Brazil showed great flexibility in Bonn
in dealing with negotiating country representatives, it could not obtain firm
commitments from any country to submit their national commitments in September,
before or during the Belém summit. This issue is considered the most important
at this year’s summit according to the Paris Agreement.
Work was stalled for two days in Bonn to agree on the agenda, compared to last year when negotiations ended without a finalized agenda! This time, the reason was a proposal by the "like-minded" developing countries to consider the implementation of the developed countries’ obligations to finance climate efforts (Article 9.1 of the Paris Agreement) and the unilateral trade-restrictive measures in the discussions. Although this deadlock was eventually resolved, it set the course for future negotiations. Throughout the two weeks, disputes repeated among parties over providing means of implementation (a broad term that includes financing, technology transfer, and capacity building) for climate action.
As usual, the
Bonn Conference did not succeed in mobilizing funding for adaptation, a primary
demand of developing countries from developed countries. There was no agreement
on the outlines or on a work plan clarifying how to distribute the funds
approved by COP29 in Baku ($300 billion by 2035), despite developing countries’
demands for a timeline and concrete procedures, instead of vague promises.
Uncertain
Outcomes: Fragmented Documents and Vague Language
No agreement at
all was reached regarding the implementation program related to technology, as
the parties’ viewpoints diverged on its contribution to implementing the
decision related to the first global stocktake under the Paris Agreement,
especially concerning the energy transition.
In many issues,
the parties did not reach solutions, even though the goal was to build on the
progress made in Bonn to form a basis for further engagement at the upcoming
meeting in Belém.
The maturity of
the documents discussed in Bonn varied—some were mere compilations of
proposals, while others were labeled "possible points of
convergence." More than ever, these documents were full of warnings that
they "include differing views," and phrases such as "no
agreement reached," "do not reflect consensus," "not
comprehensive," "not official," "subject to revision,"
"do not pre-judge parties’ positions on any of the listed options,"
or "do not prevent parties from expressing other views"... etc. These
vague and non-final phrases reflect no progress at all.
The Fossil
Fuel Dilemma: A Transition Blocked by Interests
The 28th
Conference of the Parties held in Dubai issued a historic recommendation to
"transition away from fossil fuels." However, the Bonn Conference
(like the previous one in Baku) failed to translate this declaration into
specific texts, or even to "enhance the wording" related to how to
transition the global energy sector away from fossil fuels. The Bonn meeting
ended without a clear path on this fundamental issue for reducing global
emissions. The same applies to what is required regarding methane gas,
especially the kind leaking from fossil fuel extraction sites, which is
considered easier to reduce than carbon. Some went as far as affirming that
there will be no progress in translating the fossil fuel phase-out declaration
at the Belém Conference this year, due to the position of the oil-producing
countries’ lobby and because the host country launched a tender to regulate the
oil sector and explore in 172 oil and gas areas covering 146,000 km², most of
which are offshore, in addition to 47 areas in the Amazon Basin in sensitive
regions near the river mouth—areas considered promising for oil and gas
exploration companies!
Brazil’s
Challenge: Balancing Development and Climate Action
So how will
Brazil succeed in reconciling the demands for transitioning away from fossil
fuels while also advocating for developing countries' right to exploit their
fossil fuel reserves, as the developed countries once did? In addition, how
will it reconcile between the producing countries and the highly consuming
countries of fossil fuels? And who will bear the cost of this transition or the
required compensations to make it successful?
The Bonn meeting also failed to resolve the issue of who will host COP31 amid the competition between Australia and Turkey, as the Bonn Conference did not succeed in convincing either of them to give up in favor of the other.
Some logistical
matters were also discussed, along with preparations for hosting in Belém, the
rainforest city near the mouth of the Amazon River, which is not equipped to
host a conference now attended by more than 60,000 people, including official
delegations, private sector, NGOs, and media…!
The Global Political Landscape: Leadership Vacuums and Rising Tensions
Only four
months remain before the decisive global summit in Belém, and the world's
response to the climate crisis is still vague and deteriorating. It appeared in
Bonn that the European Union began an attempt it had made in the past to
replace the United States in leading the negotiations, while some were
optimistic that the situation might be better without the United States, which
has often obstructed cooperation frameworks, similar to what it accuses
oil-producing countries of doing.
Based on this, the climate crisis and the negotiation crisis are likely to worsen together. Over the past two years—and for the first time—global temperatures rose more than 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, exceeding the limit that governments pledged to respect in various climate summits.
The withdrawal
of former U.S. President Donald Trump from the Paris Climate Agreement had a
negative impact on climate negotiations, especially as it was accompanied by
his insistence on expanding the use of fossil fuels and dismantling emission
reduction efforts. Meanwhile, there has been a retreat in the EU’s green plans,
and climate became a subject of fierce political debate. China, the world's
largest emitter of greenhouse gases, announced very weak climate goals compared
to its emissions. All of this comes amid a nearly global atmosphere of military
and trade wars—destructive on one hand, and distracting attention from the
climate crisis and its disasters on the other.
The well-known
rule remains: the more spending on defense, the more retreat in climate
funding, in addition to increased emissions and pollution. Every increase in
temperature brings the world closer to the point of no return, and fires bring
more fires, global warming, and climate disasters.
Nationally determined contributions (NDCs) or national emission plans will be the focus of the Belém Summit. These plans are the foundation of the Paris Agreement and are not limited to setting general targets for the governments' determination to reduce emissions over the next decade, but also refer to measures that can be taken in various sectors to achieve these goals—such as promoting renewable energy, improving efficiency, or adapting to extreme weather events. The Brazilian presidency of the climate conference is trying to push governments to complete their NDCs by September so that the UN can evaluate them before the start of COP30 in November. Note that the number of countries that submit or do not submit these "contributions" is not a standard for evaluation, as they are optional and not mandatory, and they can be unrealistic if not misleading. Nevertheless, the trends of some major countries could be indicative.
China will be under the most watch. The world's second-largest economy and biggest emitter of greenhouse gases. Although it has become the world leader in renewable energy production, it is still the largest user of coal in manufacturing.
While it aims
to double its renewable energy generation capacity by 2030 compared to 2022
levels, it still approves the establishment of new coal-fired power plants and
investments in mining!
The European
Union has set its carbon target for 2040, expected to include at least a 90%
reduction in carbon emissions compared to 1990 levels. But this target is still
under heated debate and is tied to the extent of acceptance of carbon credit
exchanges with other countries—a trick adopted in the 1997 Kyoto Protocol that
failed to reduce emissions in developed countries or push developing countries
to change their energy policies or lower their emissions.
Additionally,
other major emitting countries like India, Japan, Canada, and Russia have not
yet submitted their plans. Of course, they have not deviated from their
contradictory policies similar to China’s approach.
The United
Kingdom has submitted somewhat ambitious contributions aiming to reduce
emissions by 81% by 2035 compared to 1990 levels. However, it has also not
stopped exploration projects or fossil fuel funding.
It is worth noting that emission reduction contributions are needed in the short term, not in the distant future. Remaining within the 1.5°C limit requires radical and immediate reductions at once. None of the nationally determined contributions proposed for 2030 have been updated, even as temperatures have risen 1.5°C last year and this year!
It will be difficult to achieve progress in financing in Brazil this year after the United States withdrew from climate financing and other forms of foreign aid. Poor countries are demanding concrete plans on how to access financial flows. Brazil, along with Azerbaijan, the host of last year's conference, is working on a "Baku to Belém Roadmap" to be launched in October, before the start of COP30. However, none of this will help achieve any progress as long as the fundamentals of the negotiations remain the same and do not address how to change the dominant market economy and regulate competition in markets over everything—destroying resources and the climate together.
Brazil’s
COP30 Strategy: Seeking Hope Amidst Disappointment
In the Bonn
Conference, it was unclear where the issue of fossil fuel transition could be
discussed in the COP30 agenda, and it appears that the Brazilian presidency is
embarrassed by this file, which was also ignored in COP29.
Despite the
disappointments of the past two preparatory weeks, the Brazilian presidency
tried to compensate for the COP30 program by holding sessions that include
former COP presidents since the Paris Agreement in 2015, a session that
includes finance ministers from around the world, and a group of economists. It
also designated a track for Indigenous peoples, with a "Global Ethical
Evaluation" aiming to reflect their concerns, with the participation of
Brazilian Environment Minister Marina Silva and climate activists, including
former Irish President Mary Robinson. Brazil also set up a "Work
Agenda" to monitor progress made in past COP initiatives and highlight key
issues related to the climate crisis, such as food and agriculture, forests and
nature, water, oceans, social justice, and equity.
Recent publications
