The much hyped about COP-26 Summit has failed to deliver favourable outcomes to decelerate increase in temperature by less than 1.5 degrees. Delegations from across the world took time to reiterate commitments to emission reductions in the event which was held from 31 October to 13 November 2021 in Glasgow, Scotland.
Raising ambitions on NDCs is being spoken about by many countries, but the action on the ground is failing to tally with the urgency. Glasgow will go down in the history of climate talks as a missed opportunity. The commitments to deal with coal emissions and fossil fuels were toned down in the final text. This reneging, reversed all the efforts which have been put into the discussion.
If the world is to reduce emissions drastically, action must be taken to reduce emissions especially those coming from fossil fuels. The major sources of greenhouse gas emissions are traditional fossil fuels such as coal. The world’s reliance on coal makes it difficult to strike any meaningful agreement.
Although a deal was stuck in Glasgow, it is weak. The major issues which will halt climate change remain circumnavigated and a fossil based and coal-powered economy remains on the table. It is not a good thing to see some of the top polluters in the world reneging when it comes to ending subsidies on fossil fuels and let alone continue supporting a coal-based development model.
Major coal producers prefer to go towards a “phase down” of coal rather than a “phase out”. These semantics and their implications remain mind-boggling to a plethora of delegations. In some cases, it may mean loss of jobs and close down of whole sectors. In another perspective it may mean meeting the targets of emission reductions. Consensus in such circumstance is as rare as brushing the teeth of a lion.
Due to the different country contexts and the fact that countries depend on different natural resources, it is difficult at times to reach consensus when some countries see the agents of pollution as a source of income. Negotiators faced a tough time in Glasgow in trying to harmonise perception and bring stronger commitments that would lead us towards a carbon neutral future.
For African countries, this means another long wait to redemption as they bear the brunt of climate change due to the higher levels of vulnerability. As delegations circumnavigated decisive and commanding text, in favour of loose text which is based on encouraging action, an agreement in Glasgow was watered down.
With no country willing to take responsibility for historical damage caused in the path to irreversible climate change, pledges for financing continue to be made at a level which is far less that the demand for financial resources. Meagre resources available for financing climate change, make it difficult for putting the plans into practice
