Global stocktake at Conference of Parties?
This year’s COP summit saw the first global stocktake (GST).
According to the UNFCCC, the GST “enables countries and other stakeholders to see where they are collectively making progress towards meeting the goals of the Paris Agreement.
The decision of countries’ at COP-28 to transition away from fossil fuels was coupled with the ambition to triple renewable energy capacity by 2030.
More than 20 countries also pledged to triple their nuclear energy capacity.
The transition from fossil fuels is restricted to energy systems.
They can continue to be used in the plastics, transport, and agriculture sectors.
The declaration also refers to ‘transitional fuels’, such as natural gas, for ensuring energy security.
But this falls short of true climate justice as it allows industries to continue operating in the business-as-usual mode.
While the declaration called for accelerated climate mitigation, it alluded to unproven and risky technologies such as carbon capture and storage (CCS) and carbon removal.
The former enables users of fossil fuels to prevent their emissions from entering the atmosphere by capturing the emissions at the source and storing them permanently underground.
Novel mechanisms introduced with respect to accelerating green finance?
The financial segment of the GST implementation framework explicitly recognises the responsibility of developed nations to take the lead in climate finance.
There is also a reference to the private sector’s role in addressing financial shortfalls and an imperative to supplement grant-oriented,
concessional finance to enable equitable transition in developing countries.
Specific information regarding the entities obligated to furnish this grant based finance is lacking.
The COP-28 also witnessed the establishment of innovative global green-finance mechanisms to support developing nations in their transition to sustainable practices.
The Green Climate Fund received fresh support of $3.5 billion, allowing it to finance adaptation and mitigation projects in vulnerable regions.
An additional $188 million was pledged to the Adaptation Fund.
New partnerships between public and private sectors were forged to mobilise investments in renewable energy, sustainable agriculture, and infrastructure.
The COP-28 Presidency also introduced ALTÉRRA, an investment initiative with an ambitious goal to globally mobilise an unprecedented sum of $250 billion by 2030.
Despite these efforts, the available funds fall well short of the $194-366 billion annual funding requirement for adaptation, as estimated by the United Nations.
Why did India not sign the health and methane reduction declarations?
COP- 28 recognises the growing health impacts of climate change and acknowledges the benefits of climate action.
It includes a reduction in air pollution and lowering the cost of healthcare.
The declaration, signed by 123 countries, has collectively committed $1 billion to address the growing climate-health crisis.
India didn’t sign this declaration because reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the health sector would mean reduction in emissions from gases used for cooling.
As India’s healthcare infrastructure is still growing, such a commitment could compromise the healthcare requirements of a growing population, particularly rural.
The Global Methane Pledge launched at COP-26 received renewed attention at COP-28.
The Climate and Clean Air Coalition becoming the new secretariat and partners of the pledge announcing more than $1 billion in new grants for funding projects to reduce methane emissions from the agriculture, waste, and gas sectors.
More than 150 countries signed the pledge to reduce methane pollution.
India isn’t a signatory to this pledge because it shifts focus from carbon dioxide to methane, a GHG with a lower lifetime.
Also, methane emissions in India are primarily from rice cultivation and enteric fermentation (livestock rearing), which support the livelihoods of small and marginal farmers.
COMMENTS