Pressure for more climate protection is growing

For the first time, the farewell to coal was included in the final document at a world climate conference – even if the disputes over the final formulation dragged on until the end of the conference. Even before that, the original wording had been weakened again and again in response to pressure from countries such as China, India, Russia and Saudi Arabia. With the final declaration, however, the states are now being called on to accelerate their efforts to initiate the phase-out of coal.

Svenja Schulze, acting Federal Environment Minister, and EU Commissioner Frans Timmermans spoke of a “historic moment”. It is now “clear worldwide that there will be an exit from coal and that there will be an end to fossil subsidies,” said the SPD politician in an initial statement. International climate policy is thus formulating “a new economic model”.

The states were asked to end their subsidies for fossil fuels – but with the addition that “inefficient” subsidies were meant. This met with criticism from environmentalists: It is up to each country to declare its subsidies in climate-damaging energies to be efficient.

Nevertheless, environmental and development organizations spoke of a strong signal. “In retrospect, this climate summit could one day be seen as a turning point for the global exit from coal,” said Christoph Bals, Political Director of Germanwatch.

Coal is the most polluting energy source. The fact that the goal of phasing out coal is included in the final declaration is not least thanks to the British COP presidency, which made the end of coal a priority. In previous resolutions, coal, oil and gas were not explicitly named as the main drivers of climate change.

Increase ambitions

The states recognize the scientific findings that the world will have to do significantly more in terms of climate protection in this decade in order to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius in a pre-industrial comparison. It is recognized that a limit of 1.5 degrees will require “rapid, deep and sustainable reductions” in global greenhouse gas emissions, according to the final statement.

Glasgow revived the 1.5 degree target, but it is in intensive care, said Niklas Höhne from the NewClimate Institute. In the Paris Climate Agreement, concluded in 2015, there is talk of a limit to below two degrees, or better than 1.5 degrees. At the current pace, however, said Höhne, “the 1.5 degree goal is lost”.

It is explicitly mentioned that carbon dioxide emissions will have to fall by 45 percent by 2030 compared to 2010 levels if the target is to be achieved. That is considered extremely ambitious. There is still a significant gap between the goals of the states and the implementation of measures. So far, emissions have been rising.

Environmentalists consider the fact that China has not yet submitted a more stringent climate target for 2030 to be a “huge problem”. In addition, the implementation of the announced new target is not guaranteed in the USA.

The climate pact between the USA and China in the middle of the week had raised hopes that new, more ambitious initiatives in the industrialized countries would again be possible. “If the EU teams up with the USA and China, they can form a G3 of the climate, a bloc of the largest economic powers and greenhouse gas emitters, which can determine the rules of the game for the entire planet,” said Ottmar Edenhofer, Director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research. the Rheinische Post on Saturday.

The world’s two largest emitters had signed an agreement during the conference to reduce methane emissions, protect forests and phase out coal. In 2025, they also want to announce new climate targets for the period up to 2035.

Increase climate aid

The rich countries are asked to double the financial support for adaptation to the climatic changes in the poorer countries compared to the current level. What is new is that this should happen by 2025.

This means that the new federal government also has an obligation to significantly increase the commitments made by the previous government.

Until the end of the conference, there was a dispute about helping the poorest countries in the world to adapt to climate change and to cope with the damage; it was one of the main points of conflict between developing and industrialized countries. The developing countries insisted on concrete assurances – with moderate success. Germany put ten million euros on the table in the short term, but that is not enough to meet the rapidly increasing demand in the countries affected by climate change. The EU and the USA have resisted setting up a so-called “Loss & Damage Fund”.

“It is bitter that once again the poorer countries of the Global South, which were particularly hard hit by the climate crisis, have been marginalized,” said Jan Kowalzig, climate expert at Oxfam. “Your call for support in coping with the damage and destruction caused by climate change – once the limits of adaptation have been reached – went virtually unheard again.”

With luck, the countries could hope for limited technical support in the coming years, for example with planning for reconstruction after severe weather disasters, but not for financial aid for the reconstruction itself Kowalzig.

Rulebook added

It was cleaned up with some technical agreements that had been outstanding for years on the so-called “rule book” for the Paris climate agreement. It was about transparency and verifiability, for example when states report to the United Nations Climate Secretariat on their progress in climate protection. There were also regulations on how projects from industrialized countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in poorer countries are taken into account. Germany and other states want clear regulations so that double counting can be avoided.

As of soon, unused CO2 credits from climate protection projects from the pre-Paris era will be allowed to count towards the current climate targets of the countries under the Paris Agreement. Environmental organizations are critical of this.

It was decided that all countries would have to report their emissions in detail by 2024. This is the basis, among other things, for the comparability of greenhouse gases. Each country can use it to judge what other countries are doing. It was agreed that all countries should submit climate plans to the United Nations every five years in order to have a common time frame for national climate plans from 2025.

Criticism of Germany

The Federation for the Environment and Nature Conservation Germany (BUND) expressed its disappointment with the conference. Even five years after the Paris Climate Agreement came into force, the international community is not in a position to draw up sufficient plans to avert the climate crisis and its catastrophic effects, said BUND boss Olaf Bandt.

It is positive that the countries are obliged to revise their emission reduction targets in the course of the coming year, said CARE expert Sven Harmeling. But if negotiations continue to be slowed down by oil, gas and coal countries, it must be clearly stated: “The 1.5 degree limit of maximum warming needs more political speed.”
Germany is also being criticized. The country had a weak performance, “in particular the prospective new Chancellor Olaf Scholz shone through silence,” according to the BUND. In the election campaign he was still titled as climate chancellor by himself, but now there is no clear commitment on behalf of the coalition that is being formed to a new start for Germany in terms of climate protection.

“Nobody can sit back now,” said Oxfam climate expert Kowalzig. None of the major economies is currently ready to make a sufficient and fair contribution to the climate protection that is required globally, including Germany. The next federal government must immediately present a plan that will put Germany on a path compatible with the 1.5 degree limit of the Paris Agreement. “Above all, the FDP and SPD will have to move significantly in the next few weeks.”

“Some countries have clocked, blocked, played for time in Glasgow,” commented Michael Schäfer, head of climate and environmental policy at the Naturschutzbund Deutschland (Nabu). More dynamism is needed – also in Berlin, so that Germany no longer remains a watcher when it comes to international climate policy. Obviously, the traffic light has not even succeeded in underlining the climate goals of the grand coalition with measures, let alone going beyond them. “Olaf Scholz now has to overcome these blockages.”

More: “Climate protection overall task of the government”: environmental organizations join the Greens