If it wasn’t already apparent, the foxes were well and truly inside the hen house at this year’s meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC.
While some progress was made regarding side table issues like the stemming of methane releases, the cessation of routine flaring of natural gas, and increased funding for climate related disasters, the conference has been overshadowed by what many in attendance regard as a move backwards in relation to the much needed phase out of fossil fuels in order to rapidly reduce global emissions.
Spinifex is an opinion column. If you would like to contribute, contact us to ask for a detailed brief.
Rather than firming up requirements for the phase out of fossil fuels and developing a clear, unambiguous direction for decarbonisation, COP28 President Sultan Al-Jaber, delegates from the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and a festoon of fossil fuel lobbyists who now represent the largest cohort at the COP summits have destabilised discussions.
They have insisted that the phase out of fossil fuels is in fact not a requirement to meet emission reduction targets, but rather a “nice to have” option for countries to opt into at some point in the next 27 years.
Their logic is, more or less, that while the science clearly indicates a need to reduce emissions, there is no evidence that it would require an accelerated and organised divestment from fossil fuels before 2030.
Instead, the final text reads that parties should be “transitioning away from fossil fuels in energy systems, in a just, orderly and equitable manner… so as to achieve net zero by 2050 in keeping with the science.”
Equitable for who exactly? The Pacific Island nations soon to be swallowed by the seas, or the thousands displaced by bushfires in Australia, Canada, and the US?
Or is this equity for the fossil fuel giants who for decades have denied the existence of climate change, only recently accepting the mountain of evidence that their products are the main sources of greenhouse gas emissions.
Now, amidst cries of alarmism or climate radicalism, we hear talk of an orderly and equitable transition – not a phase out or even a phase down, but a transition to take place between now and 2050.
So-called promising technology such as carbon capture and storage, in the eyes of fossil fuel giants, will enable oil and gas expansion in parallel with emission reductions on the massive scale required to prevent catastrophic climate change.
Never mind that CCS is both prohibitively expensive and remarkably ineffective, or that the technology needed to enable their plan does not yet exist at scale. COP28 president Sultan Al-Jaber stunned COP audiences with oxymoronic nuggets of wisdom such as:
“I am here, factual, and I respect the science. And there is no science out there or no scenario out there that says that the phase out of fossil fuels is what’s going to achieve 1.5 degrees.”
COP28 President Al-Jaber is also the minister of industry and advanced technology of the United Arab Emirates and head of the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company, a $US65billion (A$96 b) state owned oil venture with plans to become the world’s second largest oil producer by 2050.
Research from Global Witness indicates that even in the short-term, between now and 2030 ADNOC plans to increase oil production by a staggering 41.5 per cent, second only to Brazilian firm Petrobras (47.5 per cent), with 2030 being the same year in which the UN’s climate science body, and Al-Jaber himself, say GHG emissions must decrease by 43 per cent to maintain the 1.5C goal.
In an attempt to mitigate related emissions and demonstrate progress towards sustainability objectives, ADNOC has revised its 2030 carbon capture target from 5 megatons to an ambitious 10 megatons. For comparison, their 2030 scope 3 emissions are forecast to be in the region of over 680 megatons, making one wonder why they even bother with expanding CCS at all.
The notion of phasing down rather than phasing out fossil fuels continues to remain a contentious use of language that has been carried over from COP26, where a last-minute alteration left then COP President Alok Sharma fighting back tears, later apologising after the commitment to “phase out” coal, which was included in earlier drafts, was changed to “phase down” after prolonged campaigning from delegates representing China and India.
The final text from COP28 also included some concerning language, with the coal statement being even further watered down from “rapidly phasing down unabated coal” and putting “limitations on permitting” to simply referencing “efforts towards the phase-down of unabated coal power”.
The COP28 final draft also now includes a heightened emphasis on transitional fuels such as gas and oil, ensuring a future market for fossil fuel producers for decades to come. Notably, the guidance for this transition directly refers only to fossil fuels used in energy production systems.
The notion of unabated fossil fuels is also rather concerning, as abated fossil fuels would require a carbon sequestration initiative the likes of which the world has never seen.
While Al-Jaber claims that ADNOCs is making real progress towards decarbonising their extraction operations, reports show that despite a 20 year old pledge to halt routine flaring in gas fields, ADNOC LNG fields flared gas on more than 99 per cent of the days monitored by satellite from 2018 to 2022, according to data produced by the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air.
With such low levels of compliance with existing commitments and a speculative CCS plan that meets less than 1.5 per cent of projected 2030 scope 3 emissions, it remains unclear exactly how ADNOC and other fossil fuel giants will ensure that emissions related to the increased use of their products will be effectively abated.
Back at COP28, Al-Jaber’s publicity disaster only deepened during a heated exchange with former Irish President Mary Robinson at a panel themed on Women & Climate. Robinson criticised Al-Jaber’s blasé approach to decarbonisation, saying,
“We’re in an absolute crisis that is hurting women and children more than anyone … and it’s because we have not yet committed to phasing out fossil fuel. That is the one decision that COP28 can take and in many ways, because you’re head of ADNOC, you could actually take it with more credibility.”
Al Jaber responded by stating that:
“I accepted to come to this meeting to have a sober and mature conversation. I’m not in any way signing up to any discussion that is alarmist. There is no science out there, or no scenario out there, that says that the phase-out of fossil fuel is what’s going to achieve 1.5C.”
Upon further comments from Robinson regarding ADNOCs planned fossil fuel expansion, Al-Jaber continued on the offensive in what can only be described as a series of tone deaf clangers,
“You’re reading your own media, which is biased and wrong. I am telling you I am the man in charge.”
“Please help me, show me the roadmap for a phase-out of fossil fuel that will allow for sustainable socioeconomic development, unless you want to take the world back into caves.”
“I don’t think [you] will be able to help solve the climate problem by pointing fingers or contributing to the polarisation and the divide that is already happening in the world. Show me the solutions. Stop the pointing of fingers. Stop it.”
Belittling a former head of state, insisting that as the man in charge at a Women & Climate panel his own views are paramount, and dog whistling cries of alarmism and a “return to living in caves”, Al-Jaber not only failed to read the room but further demolished any remaining façade of bilateral cooperation between Gulf OPEC nations and the broader COP community.
Bill Hare, the chief executive of Climate Analytics, told The Guardian that,
“This is an extraordinary, revealing, worrying and belligerent exchange. ‘Sending us back to caves’ is the oldest of fossil fuel industry tropes: it’s verging on climate denial.”
“Al Jaber is asking for a 1.5C roadmap – anyone who cares can find that in the International Energy Agency’s latest net zero emissions scenario, which says there cannot be any new fossil fuel development. The science is absolutely clear [and] that absolutely means a phase-out by mid-century, which will enhance the lives of all of humanity.”
It seems the organisers of COP have little to no self-awareness of the optics and blatant conflict of interest that arises from having someone clearly invested in the continuation of fossil fuel expansion leading the discussion for global decarbonisation.
With 2023 being the hottest year in record and the world creeping ever closer to lapsing past the 1.5 degree threshold, COP28 has served only to further halt and divide productive discussion in the latest manifestation of the decades old go-slow approach espoused by fossil fuel producers.
As COP28 winds down, pundits are already speculating that COP29, hosted by Azerbaijan, will likely be a continuation of this year’s climate stagnation. Azerbaijan is a nation where oil and gas exports comprised more than 92.5 per cent of export revenue. One must wonder how enthusiastic the leaders of this nation are about the transition away from fossil fuels, and the sort of productive discussion that the host nation will lead.
With friends such as these fronting the battle against climate change, who needs enemies?