EUROPE CORRESPONDENT
GLASGOW, SCOTLAND:format(jpeg)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/tgam/N6CWAEV3YVKJZMS3HLGYJFCP5Y.jpg)
Demonstrators join the Fridays for Future march on Nov. 5, 2021, in Glasgow, Scotland. Global negotiators reached an agreement late Saturday at the UN conference after a one-day delay and three draft proposals.
GLASGOW, SCOTLAND
Demonstrators join the Fridays for Future march on Nov. 5, 2021, in Glasgow, Scotland. Global negotiators reached an agreement late Saturday at the UN conference after a one-day delay and three draft proposals.
JEFF J MITCHELL/GETTY IMAGES
The COP26 climate summit in Glasgow has ended with nearly 200 countries endorsing an agreement to cut carbon emissions, scale back the use of coal and fossil fuels and provide more support to developing nations to help them adapt to global warming.
The agreement, called the Glasgow Climate Pact, came late Saturday at the United Nations conference after a one-day delay and three draft proposals. It builds on the 2015 Paris climate treaty by listing a series of decisions and resolutions that all countries have agreed to adopt. They include accelerating national action plans to limit global warming.
The overall objective of the pact is to cap the rise in the global temperature at 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels, which scientists say is critical to avoiding the worst consequences of climate change.
John Kerry, the U.S. climate envoy, called the pact a “powerful statement” that raised global ambitions to protect the planet. “Not everyone in public life gets to make choices about life and death,” he said during a plenary session on Saturday. “Not everyone gets to make choices that actually affect an entire planet. We here are privileged today to do exactly that.”
However, the deal received only lukewarm backing from delegates representing dozens of poorer countries. They said it contains far too many compromises and fails to commit developed countries to paying for the damage climate change has already done to the developing world.
The deal “does not bring hope to our hearts, but serves as yet another conversation where we put our homes on the line while those who have other options decide how quickly they want to act,” said Shauna Aminath, the minister of environment for the Maldives.
“I need some more reassurance from our developed-country partners,” said Gabon’s environment minister, Lee White. “Africa risks being destabilized by climate change. It’s already, in certain of our countries, a matter of life and death. Already we are seeing some of our nations failing.”
There were also questions about whether the agreement will achieve its main objective: meeting the 1.5-degree target.
As part of the COP process, more than 100 countries, including Canada, have pledged to reach net-zero carbon emissions by 2030 or 2050, although China’s target is 2060 and India’s is 2070. However, a recent report from Climate Action Tracker, a coalition of scientists from around the world, said the goals are little more than “false hope.” The group said that, based on the commitments made at COP26, the Earth is set to warm by 2.4 degrees by 2100. Even if every country fully met its targets, a 1.8-degree rise was likely, the report added.:format(jpeg)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/tgam/4T43C7PYA5KNLJXA5W7DQP3E54.jpg)
U.S. climate envoy John Kerry, centre, walks with, from left, Brazil's Joaquim Alvaro Pereira Leite, European Union's Frans Timmermans and China's Xie Zhenhua before the closing plenary session at the COP26 summit in Glasgow, Scotland, on Nov. 13, 2021.
The COP26 climate summit in Glasgow has ended with nearly 200 countries endorsing an agreement to cut carbon emissions, scale back the use of coal and fossil fuels and provide more support to developing nations to help them adapt to global warming.
The agreement, called the Glasgow Climate Pact, came late Saturday at the United Nations conference after a one-day delay and three draft proposals. It builds on the 2015 Paris climate treaty by listing a series of decisions and resolutions that all countries have agreed to adopt. They include accelerating national action plans to limit global warming.
The overall objective of the pact is to cap the rise in the global temperature at 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels, which scientists say is critical to avoiding the worst consequences of climate change.
John Kerry, the U.S. climate envoy, called the pact a “powerful statement” that raised global ambitions to protect the planet. “Not everyone in public life gets to make choices about life and death,” he said during a plenary session on Saturday. “Not everyone gets to make choices that actually affect an entire planet. We here are privileged today to do exactly that.”
However, the deal received only lukewarm backing from delegates representing dozens of poorer countries. They said it contains far too many compromises and fails to commit developed countries to paying for the damage climate change has already done to the developing world.
The deal “does not bring hope to our hearts, but serves as yet another conversation where we put our homes on the line while those who have other options decide how quickly they want to act,” said Shauna Aminath, the minister of environment for the Maldives.
“I need some more reassurance from our developed-country partners,” said Gabon’s environment minister, Lee White. “Africa risks being destabilized by climate change. It’s already, in certain of our countries, a matter of life and death. Already we are seeing some of our nations failing.”
There were also questions about whether the agreement will achieve its main objective: meeting the 1.5-degree target.
As part of the COP process, more than 100 countries, including Canada, have pledged to reach net-zero carbon emissions by 2030 or 2050, although China’s target is 2060 and India’s is 2070. However, a recent report from Climate Action Tracker, a coalition of scientists from around the world, said the goals are little more than “false hope.” The group said that, based on the commitments made at COP26, the Earth is set to warm by 2.4 degrees by 2100. Even if every country fully met its targets, a 1.8-degree rise was likely, the report added.
U.S. climate envoy John Kerry, centre, walks with, from left, Brazil's Joaquim Alvaro Pereira Leite, European Union's Frans Timmermans and China's Xie Zhenhua before the closing plenary session at the COP26 summit in Glasgow, Scotland, on Nov. 13, 2021.
ALASTAIR GRANT/THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
New Zealand’s Climate Change Minister, James Shaw, acknowledged on Saturday that the Glasgow Pact likely won’t meet the goal. “Is it enough to hold temperatures to 1.5C? I don’t think I can say it does,” he told the summit.
Despite the reservations, many delegates said the pact represented a significant step forward in the battle against climate change. “Glasgow has delivered a strong message of hope,” said Seve Paeniu, Tuvalu’s Minister of Finance, as he held up a photograph of his three grandchildren. “Glasgow has delivered a strong message of ambition. What is left now is for us to deliver on that promise.”
One of the biggest issues during the summit has been how far developed nations should go in helping vulnerable countries recover from the effects of global warming. This kind of reparation, known as “loss and damage,” has been a controversial topic for years at UN summits and it has never been included in a COP agreement.
The U.S., Canada and many other developed countries have resisted calls from developing countries for a special “loss and damages fund,” which according to some studies could reach US$400-billion a year by 2030. They argue the groundwork hasn’t been laid to determine how the fund would operate, and whether a non-government organization or the private sector would be involved.
“I really don’t think we are at the stage where we can start talking about separate funds,” Canada’s Environment Minister, Steven Guilbeault, said Friday. He added that Canada was “happy to see conversation move forward.”
The Glasgow Pact includes provisions to fund a UN agency, the Santiago Network, which will work on developing technical and financial assistance for loss and damage associated with climate change. And the pact calls for further discussion of a financial mechanism for dealing with the issue.
Developed nations have also faced criticism for failing to meet a deadline to mobilize US$100-billion annually to help poorer countries develop plans to mitigate global warming. The pledge, which is separate from reparations, was supposed to have been met by 2020, but likely won’t be fulfilled until 2023.
Saturday’s agreement re-commits countries to the financial pledge and calls for meetings to take place every two years to discuss financial support. It also urges developed countries to “at least double their collective provision of climate finance for adaptation to developing country parties.”
Another key issue throughout the summit has been the future of coal and fossil fuels. Many nations wanted the pact to call for countries to phase out those energy sources.
However, after objections from several countries the wording was softened to call for phasing out “unabated coal power” and “inefficient subsidies for fossil fuels, recognizing the need for support towards a just transition.” In a late intervention on Saturday, India’s Environment Minister, Bhupender Yadav, weakened the language further by changing “phase out” to “phase down.”
Mr. Yadav’s intervention drew criticism from the European Union and several countries. COP26 President Alok Sharma apologized for the late change but urged delegates to support the revised pact, which in the end they did.
Unabated coal refers to coal power generation that doesn’t use technology, such as carbon capture and storage, to reduce emissions. Energy companies have argued that using that technology means they can burn coal and control carbon emissions, but environmentalists say the technology has yet to fully develop and it shouldn’t be used as an excuse to continue emissions.
Climate campaigners said that while the Glasgow Pact has some positive features, it fails to reflect the urgency of the climate crisis. “Clearly some world leaders think they aren’t living on the same planet as the rest of us,” said Gabriela Bucher, the international executive director of Oxfam. “It seems no amount of fires, rising sea levels or droughts will bring them to their senses to stop increasing emissions at the expense of humanity.”
Jennifer Morgan of Greenpeace added: “It’s meek, it’s weak and the 1.5C goal is only just alive, but a signal has been sent that the era of coal is ending. And that matters.”
New Zealand’s Climate Change Minister, James Shaw, acknowledged on Saturday that the Glasgow Pact likely won’t meet the goal. “Is it enough to hold temperatures to 1.5C? I don’t think I can say it does,” he told the summit.
Despite the reservations, many delegates said the pact represented a significant step forward in the battle against climate change. “Glasgow has delivered a strong message of hope,” said Seve Paeniu, Tuvalu’s Minister of Finance, as he held up a photograph of his three grandchildren. “Glasgow has delivered a strong message of ambition. What is left now is for us to deliver on that promise.”
One of the biggest issues during the summit has been how far developed nations should go in helping vulnerable countries recover from the effects of global warming. This kind of reparation, known as “loss and damage,” has been a controversial topic for years at UN summits and it has never been included in a COP agreement.
The U.S., Canada and many other developed countries have resisted calls from developing countries for a special “loss and damages fund,” which according to some studies could reach US$400-billion a year by 2030. They argue the groundwork hasn’t been laid to determine how the fund would operate, and whether a non-government organization or the private sector would be involved.
“I really don’t think we are at the stage where we can start talking about separate funds,” Canada’s Environment Minister, Steven Guilbeault, said Friday. He added that Canada was “happy to see conversation move forward.”
The Glasgow Pact includes provisions to fund a UN agency, the Santiago Network, which will work on developing technical and financial assistance for loss and damage associated with climate change. And the pact calls for further discussion of a financial mechanism for dealing with the issue.
Developed nations have also faced criticism for failing to meet a deadline to mobilize US$100-billion annually to help poorer countries develop plans to mitigate global warming. The pledge, which is separate from reparations, was supposed to have been met by 2020, but likely won’t be fulfilled until 2023.
Saturday’s agreement re-commits countries to the financial pledge and calls for meetings to take place every two years to discuss financial support. It also urges developed countries to “at least double their collective provision of climate finance for adaptation to developing country parties.”
Another key issue throughout the summit has been the future of coal and fossil fuels. Many nations wanted the pact to call for countries to phase out those energy sources.
However, after objections from several countries the wording was softened to call for phasing out “unabated coal power” and “inefficient subsidies for fossil fuels, recognizing the need for support towards a just transition.” In a late intervention on Saturday, India’s Environment Minister, Bhupender Yadav, weakened the language further by changing “phase out” to “phase down.”
Mr. Yadav’s intervention drew criticism from the European Union and several countries. COP26 President Alok Sharma apologized for the late change but urged delegates to support the revised pact, which in the end they did.
Unabated coal refers to coal power generation that doesn’t use technology, such as carbon capture and storage, to reduce emissions. Energy companies have argued that using that technology means they can burn coal and control carbon emissions, but environmentalists say the technology has yet to fully develop and it shouldn’t be used as an excuse to continue emissions.
Climate campaigners said that while the Glasgow Pact has some positive features, it fails to reflect the urgency of the climate crisis. “Clearly some world leaders think they aren’t living on the same planet as the rest of us,” said Gabriela Bucher, the international executive director of Oxfam. “It seems no amount of fires, rising sea levels or droughts will bring them to their senses to stop increasing emissions at the expense of humanity.”
Jennifer Morgan of Greenpeace added: “It’s meek, it’s weak and the 1.5C goal is only just alive, but a signal has been sent that the era of coal is ending. And that matters.”
It could have been worse, but our leaders failed us at Cop26. That’s the truth of it.
Countries who take this crisis seriously must seize the initiative, and make the rest pariahs
The Observer view on the Cop26 agreement
Observer editorial
Countries still lack the radical ambition to avert disaster – this accord goes nowhere near far enough
The challenges going into Cop26 in Glasgow were immense. Global temperatures have already risen by about 1.1C, and global emissions of CO2 continue to rise. In order to limit heating to 1.5C, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has said that global greenhouse gas emissions must peak in the next four years, and coal- and gas-fired plants must close within the next decade.
This requires a huge shift in global commitments: before Glasgow, the non-binding commitments countries have signed up to put the world on course to warm up by 2.7C, according to the UN – a level of overheating that would result in tens of millions of people dying as a result of drought, and large swaths of the planet becoming completely uninhabitable.
The geopolitical context always made it unlikely sufficient progress would be made at Glasgow to inspire confidence that a limit of 1.5C of warming will be achieved. Xi Jinping, president of China – the world’s largest emitter – did not attend in person.
Wealthier countries have failed to honour commitments made 12 years ago that developing countries would receive $100bn a year to help them adapt, and the UK’s cuts to international aid have eroded its moral standing as host of the conference.
Countries’ competing objectives – the desire of some states to keep drilling for oil even as others’ continuing existence is dependent on imminently halting the extraction of fossil fuels – were always going to make for a difficult set of negotiations, but the pandemic has sharpened the divide between richer and poorer nations, as some countries have vaccinated virtually all their citizens while others have barely started.
It is widely acknowledged that the UK went into the conference underprepared, as the government’s diplomatic efforts have been primarily focused on Brexit in recent years, rather than on laying the ground for the negotiations of the past two weeks.
At the 11th hour, the already-weak resolution on the phasing-out of coal and fossil fuel subsidies was watered down
The best that can be said about Cop26 is that it has kept the possibility of limiting global heating to 1.5C alive, if only by a thread. The worst outcome of this conference would have been if countries had agreed to next reopen their commitments to reduce emissions only in five years’ time, as was agreed in Paris in 2015. This would have been nothing short of a disaster.
It would have firmly put the world on the path to catastrophic and irreversible overheating – involving the deaths of tens of millions of people and the total obliteration of some countries as a result of rising sea levels. It would have thrown away humanity’s last chance of avoiding this fate.
Instead, countries have agreed to come back to revisit their commitments in a year’s time, and every year after that. Something radical will need to shift in the next year or two in order to achieve the commitments that are urgently needed to limit warming to 1.5C.
Take the UK’s net zero strategy, for example, which falls far short of what is needed in order for it to achieve its stated goal of net zero emissions by 2050. It has been estimated we need to be investing about 1% of GDP to meet this; but the government has committed just a fraction of that, and the strategy is further undermined by the government reneging on its own policy commitments, including its recent scrapping of the green homes schemes and the delay in the phase-out of gas boilers.
Cop26: the goal of 1.5C of climate heating is alive, but only just
The UK’s strategy is far from the worst in terms of its failure to be powered by strong government commitments, which serves only to convey the scale of what is still needed from countries across the world.
However, the US-China bilateral agreement, if thin in terms of commitments, is a real sign of diplomatic progress. More than 100 countries have committed to end deforestation by 2030; five of the richest countries have pledged $1.7bn to support the conservation efforts of indigenous people; and the US and EU have signed up to an initiative to cut methane emissions.
But it is not enough. There are too many gaps, too few commitments, insufficient willpower. At the 11th hour, the already-weak resolution on the phasing-out of coal and fossil fuel subsidies was watered down even further so as to make it virtually meaningless.
Countries pleaded in the final plenary sessions that they can go no further, but go further they must. Disaster is not yet certain; but humanity’s “code red” is still blaring. The cost of ignoring it is unthinkable.
Countries who take this crisis seriously must seize the initiative, and make the rest pariahs
John Kerry, the US presidential envoy for climate, walks off stage as the Cop26 talks went into extra time. Photograph: Alastair Grant/AP
John Vidal
Sat 13 Nov 2021
Where now? Governments have agreed a weak climate deal which gets us a smidgen closer to holding temperatures to a rise of 1.5C. But as regards all the most important pledges to phase out coal, reduce subsidies and protect forests, Glasgow failed.
The fossil fuel lobby, led by India, held its line, dramatically succeeding in watering down – at the last minute and without due, transparent process – the move to ‘phase out’ coal power, pledging instead to ‘phase down’. The poor came away with next to nothing, there was little urgency and we are still heading for catastrophe. Any chance of halving fast-rising emissions by 2030 – the declared aim of the talks – is now negligible.
The UN climate process must be reformed to become more nimble. It is slow and measured and requires consensus and compromise. This is usually admirable, but it works against the scale and speed of action needed in a global emergency like this when millions of lives are at stake and every year of inaction counts.
Soon we may have to accept that even when faced with flood, fire and famine, some countries will never act in the wider interest and will hinder the progress of others.
So, short of locking leaders in a room and not letting them out until they have agreed something better, the only way 1.5C can be achieved must now be for those countries who want progress to work outside the UN process. That China and the US will meet next week is possibly the most positive development of the meeting.
Leaders may not agree, but they can force the changes they could not make in Glasgow. Because most climate actions devolve to lower tiers of government, mayors, local authorities, counties and states can be enabled to slash transport and building emissions and help households.
Cities act on climate while nations delay, Sadiq Khan tells Cop26
Most are well able and willing to take the initiatives that prime ministers and presidents resist. Glasgow will have helped give them the confidence and legitimacy to propose new ideas, and to act together. All it needs is backing and money.
Equally, governments can take the gloves off, treat the few countries who are preventing climate action as criminals and reward those who do with trade deals, contracts, investments and aid.
Other strands of possible future action became apparent in the Glasgow halls. One was for an emergency Marshall-style “plan for the planet” to catapult ambitious countries into a sustainable future.
Advertisement
If trillions of dollars can be found to sort out the banking crisis or the Covid pandemic in a few weeks, then it can surely be found to help countries transition into a low carbon world, starting with the $100bn (£75bn) a year that rich countries offered the climate vulnerable in 2009.
The shameful refusal of the rich to keep their promise to the world’s poor poisoned climate negotiations for a decade and may go down in history as one of the biggest diplomatic blunders of the age.
Besides, it is pointed out, there is no shortage of money for action. There are now more than 2,700 billionaires, 600 more than one year ago. They, too, can be cajoled, bullied and taxed to make them act in everyone’s interests and commit to restore damaged nature.
And finally, the World Health Organization must declare an immediate health emergency, making the link between the pandemic and the climate crisis, and explaining to politicians that climate change really is a life or death issue and will soon become the greatest challenge to human health that the world has ever known.
World leaders failed us again in Glasgow, but the summit showed that countries with the vision to act in the interests of all will shape the future and benefit the most.
Sat 13 Nov 2021
Where now? Governments have agreed a weak climate deal which gets us a smidgen closer to holding temperatures to a rise of 1.5C. But as regards all the most important pledges to phase out coal, reduce subsidies and protect forests, Glasgow failed.
The fossil fuel lobby, led by India, held its line, dramatically succeeding in watering down – at the last minute and without due, transparent process – the move to ‘phase out’ coal power, pledging instead to ‘phase down’. The poor came away with next to nothing, there was little urgency and we are still heading for catastrophe. Any chance of halving fast-rising emissions by 2030 – the declared aim of the talks – is now negligible.
The UN climate process must be reformed to become more nimble. It is slow and measured and requires consensus and compromise. This is usually admirable, but it works against the scale and speed of action needed in a global emergency like this when millions of lives are at stake and every year of inaction counts.
Soon we may have to accept that even when faced with flood, fire and famine, some countries will never act in the wider interest and will hinder the progress of others.
So, short of locking leaders in a room and not letting them out until they have agreed something better, the only way 1.5C can be achieved must now be for those countries who want progress to work outside the UN process. That China and the US will meet next week is possibly the most positive development of the meeting.
Leaders may not agree, but they can force the changes they could not make in Glasgow. Because most climate actions devolve to lower tiers of government, mayors, local authorities, counties and states can be enabled to slash transport and building emissions and help households.
Cities act on climate while nations delay, Sadiq Khan tells Cop26
Most are well able and willing to take the initiatives that prime ministers and presidents resist. Glasgow will have helped give them the confidence and legitimacy to propose new ideas, and to act together. All it needs is backing and money.
Equally, governments can take the gloves off, treat the few countries who are preventing climate action as criminals and reward those who do with trade deals, contracts, investments and aid.
Other strands of possible future action became apparent in the Glasgow halls. One was for an emergency Marshall-style “plan for the planet” to catapult ambitious countries into a sustainable future.
Advertisement
If trillions of dollars can be found to sort out the banking crisis or the Covid pandemic in a few weeks, then it can surely be found to help countries transition into a low carbon world, starting with the $100bn (£75bn) a year that rich countries offered the climate vulnerable in 2009.
The shameful refusal of the rich to keep their promise to the world’s poor poisoned climate negotiations for a decade and may go down in history as one of the biggest diplomatic blunders of the age.
Besides, it is pointed out, there is no shortage of money for action. There are now more than 2,700 billionaires, 600 more than one year ago. They, too, can be cajoled, bullied and taxed to make them act in everyone’s interests and commit to restore damaged nature.
And finally, the World Health Organization must declare an immediate health emergency, making the link between the pandemic and the climate crisis, and explaining to politicians that climate change really is a life or death issue and will soon become the greatest challenge to human health that the world has ever known.
World leaders failed us again in Glasgow, but the summit showed that countries with the vision to act in the interests of all will shape the future and benefit the most.
Cop26 ends in climate agreement despite India watering down coal resolution
Glasgow climate pact adopted despite last-minute intervention by India to water down language on phasing out dirtiest fossil fuel
Cop26: the goal of 1.5C of climate heating is alive, but only just
Delegates pose for a photo at the end of the Cop26 climate conference. Photograph: Yves Herman/Reuters
Fiona Harvey, Damian Carrington and Libby Brooks
Sat 13 Nov 2021
Countries have agreed a deal on the climate crisis that its backers said would keep within reach the goal of limiting global heating to 1.5C, the key threshold of safety set out in the 2015 Paris agreement.
The negotiations carried on late into Saturday evening, as governments squabbled over provisions on phasing out coal, cutting greenhouse gas emissions and providing money to the poor world.
The “Glasgow climate pact” was adopted despite a last-minute intervention by India to water down language on “phasing out” coal to merely “phasing down”.
The pledges on emissions cuts made at the two-week Cop26 summit in Glasgow fell well short of those required to limit temperatures to 1.5C, according to scientific advice. Instead, all countries have agreed to return to the negotiating table next year, at a conference in Egypt, and re-examine their national plans, with a view to increasing their ambition on cuts.
Alok Sharma, the UK cabinet minister who presided over the fortnight-long Cop26 talks in Glasgow, acknowledged the scale of the task remaining: “We can now say with credibility that we have kept 1.5C alive. But, its pulse is weak and it will only survive if we keep our promises and translate commitments into rapid action.
“Before this conference, the world asked: do the parties here in Glasgow have the courage to rise to the scale of the challenge? We have responded. History has been made here in Glasgow.”
António Guterres, the UN secretary-general, also warned that further urgent work was needed: “Our fragile planet is hanging by a thread. We are still knocking on the door of climate catastrophe. It is time to go into emergency mode – or our chance of reaching net zero [emissions] will itself be zero.”
The return to negotiations next year, to begin an annual process of revising national targets on greenhouse gases, will be a fraught process, as some countries contend that they are already doing their utmost. Even the small step of agreeing to revise the plans was only achieved after overcoming stiff opposition, yet revision is essential if the world is to avoid surpassing the 1.5C threshold.
One of the fiercest disagreements in the final hours was over the wording of an intention to abandon coal, which was watered down from a “phase-out” to a “phase-down”. Yet it marked the first time that such a resolution had been made under the UN climate process.
Jennifer Morgan, executive director of Greenpeace International, said: “It’s meek, it’s weak and the 1.5C goal is only just alive, but a signal has been sent that the era of coal is ending. And that matters.”
Poor countries were also left frustrated at the pact, which they said did not address their concerns about “loss and damage”. This refers to the destruction caused by extreme weather, which is now hitting vulnerable countries far harder and more frequently than had been predicted.
Current climate finance, which is provided to countries to help them invest in green technology and other emissions-cutting efforts, and to adapt to the impacts of the climate crisis, is already falling short of promises, and even if fulfilled would be insufficient to cover these heavy losses and humanitarian disasters. By 2050, these hits could amount to a fifth of GDP for some poor countries, according to estimates from the charity Christian Aid.
But rich nations have been reluctant to agree any mechanism for providing funding for loss and damage, in part because some of the debate has been framed in terms of “compensation”, which rich countries cannot countenance.
Many observers called on countries to step up their efforts in the next year. Mary Robinson, former UN commissioner for human rights and chair of The Elders group of leaders and former statespeople, said: “Cop26 has made some progress, but nowhere near enough to avoid climate disaster. While millions around the world are already in crisis, not enough leaders came to Glasgow with a crisis mindset. People will see this as a historically shameful dereliction of duty. Leaders have extended by a year this window of opportunity to avert the worst of the climate crisis. The world urgently needs them to step up more decisively next year.”
Tina Stege, climate envoy for the Marshall Islands, representing the High Ambition Coalition of developed and developing countries, said: “This package is not perfect. The coal change and a weak outcome on loss and damage are blows. But it is real progress and elements of [it] are a lifeline for my country. We must not discount the crucial wins covered in this package.”
Mohamed Adow, director of the Nairobi-based thinktank Power Shift Africa, took a harsher view: “The needs of the world’s vulnerable people have been sacrificed on the altar of the rich world’s selfishness. The outcome here reflects a Cop held in the rich world and the outcome contains the priorities of the rich world.”
Many poor nations accepted defeat on their pleas to put stronger provisions on loss and damage into the text, in the closing hours of the conference, in order to allow the broader deal to go through.
Making the concession, Lia Nicholson, lead negotiator for Antigua and Barbuda, which chairs the 37-strong Alliance of Small Island States, said: “We are extremely disappointed and we will express our grievance in due course.”
Adow added: “We are leaving empty-handed but morally stronger, and hopeful that we can sustain the momentum in the coming year to deliver meaningful support which will allow the vulnerable to deal with the irreversible impacts of climate change, created by the polluting world, who are failing to take responsibility.”
The Cop also resolved several outstanding technical issues that had prevented aspects of the 2015 Paris climate agreement from coming into operation. These issues, on carbon trading and the “transparency” with which countries monitor and report their emissions, have dogged the annual climate meetings for six years but compromises were finally reached, which earned applause for Sharma.
Patricia Espinosa, executive secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, said: “After six years, this is a significant accomplishment.”
One of the most contentious clauses in the final decision was a vaguely worded resolution to phase down “inefficient” fossil fuel subsidies. Energy experts are clear that phasing out coal will be essential to stay within 1.5C of global heating, but the opposition to the inclusion of the reference to a phase out – particularly from major coal-using countries including China, India and South Africa – showed how hard it will be to gain a global end to the dirtiest fossil fuel in time to avoid a 1.5C rise.
Fatih Birol, executive director of the International Energy Agency, told the Guardian that more than 40% of the world’s existing 8,500 coal plants would have to close by 2030, and no new ones could be built, to stay within the limit. He said: “I would very much hope that advanced economies take a leading role and become an example for the emerging world. If they don’t do it, if they don’t show an example for the emerging world, they shouldn’t expect the emerging world to do it.”
Glasgow climate pact adopted despite last-minute intervention by India to water down language on phasing out dirtiest fossil fuel
Cop26: the goal of 1.5C of climate heating is alive, but only just
Delegates pose for a photo at the end of the Cop26 climate conference. Photograph: Yves Herman/ReutersFiona Harvey, Damian Carrington and Libby Brooks
Sat 13 Nov 2021
Countries have agreed a deal on the climate crisis that its backers said would keep within reach the goal of limiting global heating to 1.5C, the key threshold of safety set out in the 2015 Paris agreement.
The negotiations carried on late into Saturday evening, as governments squabbled over provisions on phasing out coal, cutting greenhouse gas emissions and providing money to the poor world.
The “Glasgow climate pact” was adopted despite a last-minute intervention by India to water down language on “phasing out” coal to merely “phasing down”.
The pledges on emissions cuts made at the two-week Cop26 summit in Glasgow fell well short of those required to limit temperatures to 1.5C, according to scientific advice. Instead, all countries have agreed to return to the negotiating table next year, at a conference in Egypt, and re-examine their national plans, with a view to increasing their ambition on cuts.
Alok Sharma, the UK cabinet minister who presided over the fortnight-long Cop26 talks in Glasgow, acknowledged the scale of the task remaining: “We can now say with credibility that we have kept 1.5C alive. But, its pulse is weak and it will only survive if we keep our promises and translate commitments into rapid action.
“Before this conference, the world asked: do the parties here in Glasgow have the courage to rise to the scale of the challenge? We have responded. History has been made here in Glasgow.”
António Guterres, the UN secretary-general, also warned that further urgent work was needed: “Our fragile planet is hanging by a thread. We are still knocking on the door of climate catastrophe. It is time to go into emergency mode – or our chance of reaching net zero [emissions] will itself be zero.”
The return to negotiations next year, to begin an annual process of revising national targets on greenhouse gases, will be a fraught process, as some countries contend that they are already doing their utmost. Even the small step of agreeing to revise the plans was only achieved after overcoming stiff opposition, yet revision is essential if the world is to avoid surpassing the 1.5C threshold.
One of the fiercest disagreements in the final hours was over the wording of an intention to abandon coal, which was watered down from a “phase-out” to a “phase-down”. Yet it marked the first time that such a resolution had been made under the UN climate process.
Jennifer Morgan, executive director of Greenpeace International, said: “It’s meek, it’s weak and the 1.5C goal is only just alive, but a signal has been sent that the era of coal is ending. And that matters.”
Poor countries were also left frustrated at the pact, which they said did not address their concerns about “loss and damage”. This refers to the destruction caused by extreme weather, which is now hitting vulnerable countries far harder and more frequently than had been predicted.
Current climate finance, which is provided to countries to help them invest in green technology and other emissions-cutting efforts, and to adapt to the impacts of the climate crisis, is already falling short of promises, and even if fulfilled would be insufficient to cover these heavy losses and humanitarian disasters. By 2050, these hits could amount to a fifth of GDP for some poor countries, according to estimates from the charity Christian Aid.
But rich nations have been reluctant to agree any mechanism for providing funding for loss and damage, in part because some of the debate has been framed in terms of “compensation”, which rich countries cannot countenance.
Many observers called on countries to step up their efforts in the next year. Mary Robinson, former UN commissioner for human rights and chair of The Elders group of leaders and former statespeople, said: “Cop26 has made some progress, but nowhere near enough to avoid climate disaster. While millions around the world are already in crisis, not enough leaders came to Glasgow with a crisis mindset. People will see this as a historically shameful dereliction of duty. Leaders have extended by a year this window of opportunity to avert the worst of the climate crisis. The world urgently needs them to step up more decisively next year.”
Tina Stege, climate envoy for the Marshall Islands, representing the High Ambition Coalition of developed and developing countries, said: “This package is not perfect. The coal change and a weak outcome on loss and damage are blows. But it is real progress and elements of [it] are a lifeline for my country. We must not discount the crucial wins covered in this package.”
Mohamed Adow, director of the Nairobi-based thinktank Power Shift Africa, took a harsher view: “The needs of the world’s vulnerable people have been sacrificed on the altar of the rich world’s selfishness. The outcome here reflects a Cop held in the rich world and the outcome contains the priorities of the rich world.”
Many poor nations accepted defeat on their pleas to put stronger provisions on loss and damage into the text, in the closing hours of the conference, in order to allow the broader deal to go through.
Making the concession, Lia Nicholson, lead negotiator for Antigua and Barbuda, which chairs the 37-strong Alliance of Small Island States, said: “We are extremely disappointed and we will express our grievance in due course.”
Adow added: “We are leaving empty-handed but morally stronger, and hopeful that we can sustain the momentum in the coming year to deliver meaningful support which will allow the vulnerable to deal with the irreversible impacts of climate change, created by the polluting world, who are failing to take responsibility.”
The Cop also resolved several outstanding technical issues that had prevented aspects of the 2015 Paris climate agreement from coming into operation. These issues, on carbon trading and the “transparency” with which countries monitor and report their emissions, have dogged the annual climate meetings for six years but compromises were finally reached, which earned applause for Sharma.
Patricia Espinosa, executive secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, said: “After six years, this is a significant accomplishment.”
One of the most contentious clauses in the final decision was a vaguely worded resolution to phase down “inefficient” fossil fuel subsidies. Energy experts are clear that phasing out coal will be essential to stay within 1.5C of global heating, but the opposition to the inclusion of the reference to a phase out – particularly from major coal-using countries including China, India and South Africa – showed how hard it will be to gain a global end to the dirtiest fossil fuel in time to avoid a 1.5C rise.
Fatih Birol, executive director of the International Energy Agency, told the Guardian that more than 40% of the world’s existing 8,500 coal plants would have to close by 2030, and no new ones could be built, to stay within the limit. He said: “I would very much hope that advanced economies take a leading role and become an example for the emerging world. If they don’t do it, if they don’t show an example for the emerging world, they shouldn’t expect the emerging world to do it.”
The Observer view on the Cop26 agreement
Observer editorial
Countries still lack the radical ambition to avert disaster – this accord goes nowhere near far enough
Greenpeace demonstrators raise a banner at Cop26, but the geopolitical context always made it unlikely sufficient progress would be made.
Photograph: Murdo MacLeod/The Guardian
Sat 13 Nov 2021 23.35 GMT
On Glasgow Green, there lies a stone that commemorates the spot where the engineer James Watt in 1765 conceived the idea for a separate condenser for the steam engine. It is Watt’s invention, which revolutionised the efficiency of the steam engine, that means Glasgow can lay claim to be the place from which the Industrial Revolution sprang.
Just over a quarter of a millennium later, delegates from all over the world meeting in the same city have agreed the text of a critical international agreement to try to bind countries into the action required to slow the catastrophic global heating that the Industrial Revolution set in train.
It does not go anywhere near far enough. In recent years, scientists have warned that the goal in the 2015 Paris climate agreement to limit global temperature rises to “well below” 2C above pre-industrial levels is not sufficiently ambitious.
The implications of the world heating beyond 1.5C are much worse than previously thought. Even 1.5C would still result in significantly more extreme weather events – and some irreversible changes such as sea level rises, the melting of Arctic ice and the warming and acidification of the oceans – but those impacts will be more manageable.
Sat 13 Nov 2021 23.35 GMT
On Glasgow Green, there lies a stone that commemorates the spot where the engineer James Watt in 1765 conceived the idea for a separate condenser for the steam engine. It is Watt’s invention, which revolutionised the efficiency of the steam engine, that means Glasgow can lay claim to be the place from which the Industrial Revolution sprang.
Just over a quarter of a millennium later, delegates from all over the world meeting in the same city have agreed the text of a critical international agreement to try to bind countries into the action required to slow the catastrophic global heating that the Industrial Revolution set in train.
It does not go anywhere near far enough. In recent years, scientists have warned that the goal in the 2015 Paris climate agreement to limit global temperature rises to “well below” 2C above pre-industrial levels is not sufficiently ambitious.
The implications of the world heating beyond 1.5C are much worse than previously thought. Even 1.5C would still result in significantly more extreme weather events – and some irreversible changes such as sea level rises, the melting of Arctic ice and the warming and acidification of the oceans – but those impacts will be more manageable.
The challenges going into Cop26 in Glasgow were immense. Global temperatures have already risen by about 1.1C, and global emissions of CO2 continue to rise. In order to limit heating to 1.5C, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has said that global greenhouse gas emissions must peak in the next four years, and coal- and gas-fired plants must close within the next decade.
This requires a huge shift in global commitments: before Glasgow, the non-binding commitments countries have signed up to put the world on course to warm up by 2.7C, according to the UN – a level of overheating that would result in tens of millions of people dying as a result of drought, and large swaths of the planet becoming completely uninhabitable.
The geopolitical context always made it unlikely sufficient progress would be made at Glasgow to inspire confidence that a limit of 1.5C of warming will be achieved. Xi Jinping, president of China – the world’s largest emitter – did not attend in person.
Wealthier countries have failed to honour commitments made 12 years ago that developing countries would receive $100bn a year to help them adapt, and the UK’s cuts to international aid have eroded its moral standing as host of the conference.
Countries’ competing objectives – the desire of some states to keep drilling for oil even as others’ continuing existence is dependent on imminently halting the extraction of fossil fuels – were always going to make for a difficult set of negotiations, but the pandemic has sharpened the divide between richer and poorer nations, as some countries have vaccinated virtually all their citizens while others have barely started.
It is widely acknowledged that the UK went into the conference underprepared, as the government’s diplomatic efforts have been primarily focused on Brexit in recent years, rather than on laying the ground for the negotiations of the past two weeks.
At the 11th hour, the already-weak resolution on the phasing-out of coal and fossil fuel subsidies was watered down
The best that can be said about Cop26 is that it has kept the possibility of limiting global heating to 1.5C alive, if only by a thread. The worst outcome of this conference would have been if countries had agreed to next reopen their commitments to reduce emissions only in five years’ time, as was agreed in Paris in 2015. This would have been nothing short of a disaster.
It would have firmly put the world on the path to catastrophic and irreversible overheating – involving the deaths of tens of millions of people and the total obliteration of some countries as a result of rising sea levels. It would have thrown away humanity’s last chance of avoiding this fate.
Instead, countries have agreed to come back to revisit their commitments in a year’s time, and every year after that. Something radical will need to shift in the next year or two in order to achieve the commitments that are urgently needed to limit warming to 1.5C.
Take the UK’s net zero strategy, for example, which falls far short of what is needed in order for it to achieve its stated goal of net zero emissions by 2050. It has been estimated we need to be investing about 1% of GDP to meet this; but the government has committed just a fraction of that, and the strategy is further undermined by the government reneging on its own policy commitments, including its recent scrapping of the green homes schemes and the delay in the phase-out of gas boilers.
Cop26: the goal of 1.5C of climate heating is alive, but only just
The UK’s strategy is far from the worst in terms of its failure to be powered by strong government commitments, which serves only to convey the scale of what is still needed from countries across the world.
However, the US-China bilateral agreement, if thin in terms of commitments, is a real sign of diplomatic progress. More than 100 countries have committed to end deforestation by 2030; five of the richest countries have pledged $1.7bn to support the conservation efforts of indigenous people; and the US and EU have signed up to an initiative to cut methane emissions.
But it is not enough. There are too many gaps, too few commitments, insufficient willpower. At the 11th hour, the already-weak resolution on the phasing-out of coal and fossil fuel subsidies was watered down even further so as to make it virtually meaningless.
Countries pleaded in the final plenary sessions that they can go no further, but go further they must. Disaster is not yet certain; but humanity’s “code red” is still blaring. The cost of ignoring it is unthinkable.
Last-minute coal compromise in climate deal disappoints many at COP26
'Shocking' intervention by India waters down language on coal emissions
The Associated Press · Posted: Nov 13, 2021
Almost 200 nations attending the UN Climate Change conference in Glasgow accepted a contentious climate compromise aimed at keeping alive a key target to limit global warming, but it contained a last-minute change that some high officials called a watering down of crucial language about coal. 5:12
Our planet is changing. So is our journalism. This story is part of a CBC News initiative entitled Our Changing Planet to show and explain the effects of climate change and what is being done about it.
Almost 200 nations at the COP26 climate conference in Glasgow accepted a contentious climate compromise Saturday aimed at keeping alive a key target to limit global warming, but it contained a last-minute change that some officials called a watering down of crucial language about coal.
Several countries, including small island states, said they were deeply disappointed by the change to "phase down," rather than "phase out" coal power, the single biggest source of greenhouse gas emissions.
Have questions about COP26 or climate science, policy or politics? Email us: ask@cbc.ca. Your input helps inform our coverage.
"Our fragile planet is hanging by a thread," United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said in a statement. "We are still knocking on the door of climate catastrophe."
Nation after nation had complained earlier on the final day of two weeks of talks at the UN climate change conference about how the deal isn't enough, but they said it was better than nothing and provides incremental progress, if not success.
WATCH | Why we need to set climate targets even if we miss them:
Canada and the rest of the world are falling short of meeting climate targets. Does that mean all is lost? Here’s a closer look at why it’s important to set climate targets even if we don’t hit them. 5:42
Swiss Environment Minister Simonetta Sommaruga said the change will make it harder to achieve the international goal to limit warming to 1.5 C since pre-industrial times — the more stringent threshold set in the 2015 Paris Agreement.
U.S. climate envoy John Kerry said governments had no choice but to accept India's coal language change: "If we hadn't done that we wouldn't have had an agreement."
But he insisted the deal was good news for the world.
'It's meek, it's weak'
Negotiators said the deal preserved, albeit barely, the overarching goal of limiting Earth's warming by the end of the century to 1.5 C. The world has already warmed 1.1 C compared to preindustrial times.
Governments used the word "progress" more than 20 times, but rarely used the word "success," and when they did, it was mostly in reference to reaching a conclusion, not the details in the agreement.
COP President Alok Sharma said the deal drives "progress on coal, cars, cash and trees" and is "something meaningful for our people and our planet."
Environmental activists were measured in their not-quite-glowing assessments, issued before India's last-minute change.
"It's meek, it's weak and the 1.5 C goal is only just alive, but a signal has been sent that the era of coal is ending. And that matters," said Greenpeace international executive director Jennifer Morgan.
Former Irish president Mary Robinson, speaking for a group of retired leaders called The Elders, said the pact represents "some progress, but nowhere near enough to avoid climate disaster."
"People will see this as a historically shameful dereliction of duty."
'For heaven's sake, don't kill this moment'
Indian Environment Minister Bhupender Yadav argued against a provision on phasing out coal, saying that developing countries were "entitled to the responsible use of fossil fuels."
He blamed "unsustainable lifestyles and wasteful consumption patterns" in rich countries for causing global warming.
After Yadav first raised the spectre of changing the coal language, a frustrated Frans Timmermans, the European Union vice-president and climate envoy, begged negotiators to unite for future generations.
'Shocking' intervention by India waters down language on coal emissions
The Associated Press · Posted: Nov 13, 2021
Almost 200 nations attending the UN Climate Change conference in Glasgow accepted a contentious climate compromise aimed at keeping alive a key target to limit global warming, but it contained a last-minute change that some high officials called a watering down of crucial language about coal. 5:12
Our planet is changing. So is our journalism. This story is part of a CBC News initiative entitled Our Changing Planet to show and explain the effects of climate change and what is being done about it.
Almost 200 nations at the COP26 climate conference in Glasgow accepted a contentious climate compromise Saturday aimed at keeping alive a key target to limit global warming, but it contained a last-minute change that some officials called a watering down of crucial language about coal.
Several countries, including small island states, said they were deeply disappointed by the change to "phase down," rather than "phase out" coal power, the single biggest source of greenhouse gas emissions.
Have questions about COP26 or climate science, policy or politics? Email us: ask@cbc.ca. Your input helps inform our coverage.
"Our fragile planet is hanging by a thread," United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said in a statement. "We are still knocking on the door of climate catastrophe."
Nation after nation had complained earlier on the final day of two weeks of talks at the UN climate change conference about how the deal isn't enough, but they said it was better than nothing and provides incremental progress, if not success.
Delegates mingle during the UN climate conference in Glasgow on Saturday. Though nation after nation complained Saturday that the climate deal reached isn't enough, they said it was better than nothing and provides incremental progress, if not success. (Yves Herman/Reuters)
In the end, the summit broke ground by singling out coal, however weakly, by setting the rules for international trading of carbon credits, and by telling big polluters to return next year with improved pledges for cutting emissions.
But domestic priorities both political and economic again kept nations from committing to the fast, big cuts that scientists say are needed to keep warming below dangerous levels that would produce extreme weather and rising seas capable of erasing some island nations.
India pushed for coal changes
Ahead of the conference, the United Nations had set three criteria for success, and none of them were achieved. The UN's criteria included pledges to cut carbon dioxide emissions in half by 2030, $100 billion US in financial aid from rich nations to poor, and ensuring that half of that money went to helping the developing world adapt to the worst effects of climate change.
Negotiators from Switzerland and Mexico called the coal language change against the rules because it came so late. However, they said they had no choice but to hold their noses and go along with it.
"We did not achieve these goals at this conference," Guterres said. "But we have some building blocks for progress."
In the end, the summit broke ground by singling out coal, however weakly, by setting the rules for international trading of carbon credits, and by telling big polluters to return next year with improved pledges for cutting emissions.
But domestic priorities both political and economic again kept nations from committing to the fast, big cuts that scientists say are needed to keep warming below dangerous levels that would produce extreme weather and rising seas capable of erasing some island nations.
India pushed for coal changes
Ahead of the conference, the United Nations had set three criteria for success, and none of them were achieved. The UN's criteria included pledges to cut carbon dioxide emissions in half by 2030, $100 billion US in financial aid from rich nations to poor, and ensuring that half of that money went to helping the developing world adapt to the worst effects of climate change.
Negotiators from Switzerland and Mexico called the coal language change against the rules because it came so late. However, they said they had no choice but to hold their noses and go along with it.
"We did not achieve these goals at this conference," Guterres said. "But we have some building blocks for progress."
WATCH | Why we need to set climate targets even if we miss them:
Canada and the rest of the world are falling short of meeting climate targets. Does that mean all is lost? Here’s a closer look at why it’s important to set climate targets even if we don’t hit them. 5:42
Swiss Environment Minister Simonetta Sommaruga said the change will make it harder to achieve the international goal to limit warming to 1.5 C since pre-industrial times — the more stringent threshold set in the 2015 Paris Agreement.
U.S. climate envoy John Kerry said governments had no choice but to accept India's coal language change: "If we hadn't done that we wouldn't have had an agreement."
But he insisted the deal was good news for the world.
U.S. climate envoy John Kerry gestures as he speaks during the UN Climate Change Conference in Glasgow on Saturday. (Yves Herman/Reuters)
"We are in fact closer than we have ever been before to avoiding climate chaos and securing [cleaner] air, safer water and [a] healthier planet," he said later at a news conference.
Many other nations and climate campaigners pointed to India for making demands that weakened the final agreement.
"India's last-minute change to the language to phase down but not phase out coal is quite shocking," said Australian climate scientist Bill Hare, who tracks world emission pledges for the science-based Climate Action Tracker. "India has long been a blocker on climate action, but I have never seen it done so publicly."
Farmers say they're ready to cut the carbon in Canada's diet — but they need government help
Others approached the deal from a more positive perspective. In addition to the revised coal language, the Glasgow Climate Pact included enough financial incentives to almost satisfy poorer nations and solved a long-standing problem to pave the way for carbon trading.
The agreement also says big carbon polluting nations must submit stronger emission cutting pledges by the end of 2022.
"We are in fact closer than we have ever been before to avoiding climate chaos and securing [cleaner] air, safer water and [a] healthier planet," he said later at a news conference.
Many other nations and climate campaigners pointed to India for making demands that weakened the final agreement.
"India's last-minute change to the language to phase down but not phase out coal is quite shocking," said Australian climate scientist Bill Hare, who tracks world emission pledges for the science-based Climate Action Tracker. "India has long been a blocker on climate action, but I have never seen it done so publicly."
Farmers say they're ready to cut the carbon in Canada's diet — but they need government help
Others approached the deal from a more positive perspective. In addition to the revised coal language, the Glasgow Climate Pact included enough financial incentives to almost satisfy poorer nations and solved a long-standing problem to pave the way for carbon trading.
The agreement also says big carbon polluting nations must submit stronger emission cutting pledges by the end of 2022.
'It's meek, it's weak'
Negotiators said the deal preserved, albeit barely, the overarching goal of limiting Earth's warming by the end of the century to 1.5 C. The world has already warmed 1.1 C compared to preindustrial times.
Governments used the word "progress" more than 20 times, but rarely used the word "success," and when they did, it was mostly in reference to reaching a conclusion, not the details in the agreement.
COP President Alok Sharma said the deal drives "progress on coal, cars, cash and trees" and is "something meaningful for our people and our planet."
Environmental activists were measured in their not-quite-glowing assessments, issued before India's last-minute change.
"It's meek, it's weak and the 1.5 C goal is only just alive, but a signal has been sent that the era of coal is ending. And that matters," said Greenpeace international executive director Jennifer Morgan.
Former Irish president Mary Robinson, speaking for a group of retired leaders called The Elders, said the pact represents "some progress, but nowhere near enough to avoid climate disaster."
"People will see this as a historically shameful dereliction of duty."
'For heaven's sake, don't kill this moment'
Indian Environment Minister Bhupender Yadav argued against a provision on phasing out coal, saying that developing countries were "entitled to the responsible use of fossil fuels."
He blamed "unsustainable lifestyles and wasteful consumption patterns" in rich countries for causing global warming.
After Yadav first raised the spectre of changing the coal language, a frustrated Frans Timmermans, the European Union vice-president and climate envoy, begged negotiators to unite for future generations.
India's Environment Minister, Bhupender Yadav, is seen at COP26 on Saturday. Yadav successfully argued against a provision on phasing out coal and suggested a change in language many found disappointing. (Phil Noble/Reuters)
"For heaven's sake, don't kill this moment," Timmermans pleaded. "Please embrace this text so that we bring hope to the hearts of our children and grandchildren."
Helen Mountford, vice-president of the World Resources Institute think-tank, said India's demand may not matter as much as feared because the economics of cheaper, renewable fuel is making coal increasingly obsolete.
"Coal is dead. Coal is being phased out," she said. "It's a shame that they watered it down."
ANALYSIS Even a climate crisis can't stop the world's appetite for burning coal
Kerry and several other negotiators noted that good compromises leave everyone slightly unsatisfied.
"Paris built the arena and Glasgow starts the race," the veteran U.S. diplomat said. "And tonight the starting gun was fired."
Chinese negotiator Zhao Yingmin echoed that sentiment.
What did young climate activists think of COP26?
07:28
"I think our biggest success is to finalize the rulebook," Zhao told the Associated Press. "Now we can start implementing it and delivering it on our achieved consensus."
Among those highlighting the cost of failure was Aminath Shauna, the Maldives' minister for environment, climate change and technology.
Shauna pointed out that to stay within the warming limit nations agreed to six years ago in Paris, the world must cut CO2 emissions essentially in half in 98 months. She said the developing word needs the rich world to step up.
AUDIO Indigenous youth, Kitchener advocate share experiences from COP26
"The difference between 1.5 and 2 C is a death sentence for us," she said. "We didn't cause the climate crisis. No matter what we do, it won't reverse this."
Yassmin Fouad Abdelaziz, Egypt's environment minister, said next year's talks to be held in the Red Sea resort of Sharm el-Sheikh would focus on aid and compensation for poor countries.
As negotiators left the final session after congratulating themselves, they passed a young lone protester who sat silently with red blood-like writing on crossed arms that said: "We are watching."
"For heaven's sake, don't kill this moment," Timmermans pleaded. "Please embrace this text so that we bring hope to the hearts of our children and grandchildren."
Helen Mountford, vice-president of the World Resources Institute think-tank, said India's demand may not matter as much as feared because the economics of cheaper, renewable fuel is making coal increasingly obsolete.
"Coal is dead. Coal is being phased out," she said. "It's a shame that they watered it down."
ANALYSIS Even a climate crisis can't stop the world's appetite for burning coal
Kerry and several other negotiators noted that good compromises leave everyone slightly unsatisfied.
"Paris built the arena and Glasgow starts the race," the veteran U.S. diplomat said. "And tonight the starting gun was fired."
Chinese negotiator Zhao Yingmin echoed that sentiment.
What did young climate activists think of COP26?
07:28
"I think our biggest success is to finalize the rulebook," Zhao told the Associated Press. "Now we can start implementing it and delivering it on our achieved consensus."
Among those highlighting the cost of failure was Aminath Shauna, the Maldives' minister for environment, climate change and technology.
Shauna pointed out that to stay within the warming limit nations agreed to six years ago in Paris, the world must cut CO2 emissions essentially in half in 98 months. She said the developing word needs the rich world to step up.
AUDIO Indigenous youth, Kitchener advocate share experiences from COP26
"The difference between 1.5 and 2 C is a death sentence for us," she said. "We didn't cause the climate crisis. No matter what we do, it won't reverse this."
Yassmin Fouad Abdelaziz, Egypt's environment minister, said next year's talks to be held in the Red Sea resort of Sharm el-Sheikh would focus on aid and compensation for poor countries.
As negotiators left the final session after congratulating themselves, they passed a young lone protester who sat silently with red blood-like writing on crossed arms that said: "We are watching."
