Forget COP26, the G20 Still Struggles to Meet COP15 and COP09

COP26 is the 26th annual Conference of Parties on climate change. The goal of these meetings is to agree to methods of limiting global warming to 1.5ºC above pre-industrial levels by 2100. 

Let’s check in on a G20 meeting that is ahead of COP26.

Please note G-20 Nations Agree to Speed Up Climate Action, but Fail to Settle on Targets.

During a two-day meeting in Rome, the G-20 nations, which include the U.S., India and China, struggled to find consensus on how best to adhere to the 2015 Paris climate agreement. 

The leaders reaffirmed their commitment to the 2015 Paris agreement on climate change, which aims to “limit global warming to well below 2, preferably to 1.5 degrees Celsius” compared with preindustrial levels, according to a copy of the leaders’ final joint communiqué.

The final communiqué included no new commitments to phase out coal use domestically or fossil-fuel subsidies.

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, whose government is hosting the COP26 summit, said on Saturday that it currently looked unlikely that the 1.5 degrees Celsius target would be met. U.N. climate experts say that global warming needs to be capped at that level to avoid major environmental catastrophe.

Current national climate plans, however, “still condemn the world to a calamitous 2.7-degree increase,” U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres told reporters on Friday. Mr. Guterres has previously called carbon neutrality by 2050 “the world’s most urgent mission.”

Huge Disconnect Between Climate Rhetoric and Doing Anything About It

I posted the COP26 agenda and expected actions in Huge Disconnect Between Climate Rhetoric and Doing Anything About It.

What to Expect

  • October 30-31: Another useless communiqué reaffirming 1.5C goal.
  • 1-2 November: Lots of speeches including another world will end in 15 years keynote address. Xi Jinping will not signal China means business or if he does, it will be a lie.
  • November 4: Energy Day – Alok Sharma will fight to “make coal history”. There will be new signatories to the UN’s No New Coal pact but China and the US won’t be among them.
  • November 5: Expect noisy protests from Greta Thunberg. This goal will certainly be met but it will not accomplish a damn thing.
  • November 10: Transport day, with focus on cutting carbon from cars. Key moment: Boris Johnson will hope for new national bans on petrol and diesel car sales. If there is anything to cheer it will come in this sector. But there will not be meaningful bans on petrol other than perhaps diesel cars. Most of the success will happen anyway from car makers.
  • November 12: Negotiations are due to end, so expect last minute scuffles to delay proceedings. Key moment: release of the negotiated text. No climate target, but nations are likely to reaffirm support for 1.5C goal. The text is sure to disappoint climate change activists.

It appears we are well ahead of the schedule I proposed earlier especially in regards to coal. And we already have two mentions of environmental catastrophe.

Hopes Unfulfilled But Not Buried 

Secretary-General of the UN,  António Guterres, said “I leave Rome with my hopes unfulfilled — but at least they are not buried. Onwards to #COP26 in Glasgow to keep the goal of 1.5 degrees alive and to implement promises on finance and adaptation for people & planet.”

The Planet is Hell 

I don’t want my granddaughters to grow up and say that the planet is hell and I didn’t do enough to avoid it.”

That’s a new creative statement. Let’s see if Gretta picks up on it. 

COP09 Failure

Reuters has these comments on COP09

G20 sources said negotiations were tough over so-called “climate financing”, which refers to a 2009 pledge by rich nations to provide $100 billion per year by 2020 to help developing countries tackle climate change.

They have failed to meet the pledge, generating mistrust and a reluctance among some developing nations to accelerate their emissions reductions.

“We recall and reaffirm the commitment made by developed countries, to the goal of mobilizing jointly USD 100 billion per year by 2020 and annually through 2025 to address the needs of developing countries,” the G20 statement says.

Given that it’s 2021 headed into 2022 it seem more than a bit difficult to meet a pledge to do something by 2020.

Where the H is the Communiqué?

I spent a half an hour trying to find it but all I can find is references to it.

France 24 reports G20 leaders release watered-down final statement on climate commitments ahead of COP26.

The statement represented “half-measures” rather than “concrete urgent action”, one non-governmental organisation said.

The G20 bloc, which includes Brazil, China, India, Germany and the United States, accounts for an estimated 80% of global greenhouse gas emissions.

“This was a moment for the G20 to act with the responsibility they have as the biggest emitters, yet we only see half-measures rather than concrete urgent action,” said Friederike Roder, vice president of sustainable development advocacy group Global Citizen.

“We recognise that the impacts of climate change at 1.5°C are much lower than at 2°C. Keeping 1.5°C within reach will require meaningful and effective actions and commitment by all countries,” the communique said.

China, the world’s biggest CO2 emitter, has set a target date of 2060, and other large polluters such as India and Russia have also not committed to the 2050 target date.

The G20 also set no date for phasing out fossil fuel subsidies, saying they will aim to do so “over the medium term”.

G-20 Leaders Strike Climate Deal That Leaves a Lot to COP26

Bloomberg reports G-20 Leaders Strike Climate Deal That Leaves a Lot to COP26

In a copy of the final communique seen by Bloomberg from the G-20’s two-day summit in Rome, the language mirrors prior pledges made in the 2015 Paris climate accord. Leaders said they “remain committed to the Paris Agreement goal to hold the global average temperature increase well below 2 degrees Celsius and to pursue efforts to limit it to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.”

On domestic coal, the statement only contains a general pledge to support those countries that commit to “phasing out investment in new unabated coal power generation capacity to do so as soon as possible.” 

While COP26’s U.K. hosts had aimed to “consign coal to history,” many nations remain deeply dependent on burning the fuel that represents the biggest single obstacle to limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees. 

Negotiations over the past week saw continuous clashes over both objectives and timelines on climate, with several officials pointing the finger at holdouts China, Russia and India. The last round of talks saw negotiators known as sherpas talk throughout Saturday night, and they celebrated the end of their marathon with applause at the main La Nuvola venue at about 10 a.m.

Celebrated What? 

Check out this statement by Russia. 

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, whose country has set 2060 as its target, told reporters at a briefing. “It is not very polite to use this negotiating process the way the G-7 tried to,” Lavrov said. “Nobody has proven to us or anybody else that 2050 is something which everyone must subscribe to.”

Deal? What Deal?

The Bloomberg headline said the G-20 struck a deal. What deal was that?

I see no deal. Heck, no one will even post the final communique. 

Now it’s off to COP26 where the summit highlight will surely be Gretta lecturing the world. I can’t wait to see if she mentions hell on earth. 

Cynicism 

Yes, I am clearly a cynic on these meetings. But COP26 is no different that any G meeting (G7, G20, G100 G whatever). 

And G whatever is no different than trade meetings that fail every year over the same thing: agricultural tariffs.

For nearly 20 years I have been reporting on trade hopes and every year the result is the same. 

In the annual trade meetings the US inevitably says it will lift tariffs if the EU will. But  the EU won’t and never will because France has a veto. 

This is the 26th COP. Commitments made at COP09 and COP15 have not been met. 

What to Expect – Short Version

Expect no new commitments of any substance at COP26. If by chance there are any, they will be as meaningful in practice as commitments made at COP09.

In short, countries will do what they want, when they want, but the media will always praise Saint Gretta.  

A Word About Coal

Question of the Day

On or before Nov 5 will Gretta make a reference to the planet being hell?

Thanks for Tuning In!

Like these reports? If so, please Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen.

Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.If you have subscribed and do not get email alerts, please check your spam folder.

Mish

Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

This post originated on MishTalk.Com

Thanks for Tuning In!

Mish

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

14 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Agave
Agave
2 years ago
Eddie, I’ve read enough of your posts to know that you’re pretty on the level and interested in facts over political positioning.  I’m the same way on this issue, at least in my estimation. Nobody can really say with absolute certainty what is going to happen, but the evidence is not looking good.
A lot of what I’ve read from experts whose job is to follow this closely and daily are proposing a lot more dire scenarios faster than people expect, but are hesitant to publicly declare it. Those are very detailed and complex explanations of the various inputs, what they’ve seen so far on the outputs, and things that have surprised them (largely negatively to the downside) and their explanations of the complications of the models that are not fully understood and still cause a fair amount of uncertainty. I hope they’re wrong, but I put more stock in what they’re saying than non-experts.
There have been major climate swings over the millenia, but what we’re dealing with is a most rapid acceleration of heating that human activities have contributed to significantly, and continue to. The result is not likely to be pretty. Bottom line is, the climate doesn’t care what we think of its changes, it’s going to do its own thing anyway. It would benefit us and our successors to try to limit the impacts at a much faster rate than what we’re doing now.
Eddie_T
Eddie_T
2 years ago
Reply to  Agave
All I can say is that climate change is real and ongoing, and in the long term does represent what I’d call an existential crisis for homo sapiens….but…it’s very difficult to parse out the real short term (say next 79 years to the end of the 21st century). We will see some negative effects of climate change, but I doubt our existence as a species will be seriously threatened in that time frame.
The difficulty in  getting at the truth is at least partly made more difficult because of the amount of well-intentioned but misguided perversions of the science that finds willing publishers, and the willingness of the scientific community and the lay press and social media to report any and all bad news, ascribe every bad weather event to climate change and to generally take up political campaigning as opposed to just getting out the best information.
As always, it does help to look at the actual data, before being fooled by some biased bit of research.  The data since the IPCC started keeping track is following the mid-range models fairly well over 30 years time. That’s the best we got.
Could something happen to change the speed of climate change ? Sure……but so far the most feared causes for an acceleration of climate change have not turned out to be  nearly as bad as some predicted a decade or more ago. I’m talking specifically about methane. Certainly the loss of the arctic sea ice is scary…..and there are limits to how long the oceans can keep absorbing heat…I’m not unworried. Just unwilling to take the journalism out there at face value.
Maximus_Minimus
Maximus_Minimus
2 years ago
There will be plenty of celebrities attending as they love to virtue signal.
The usual form of travel: private jet, stepping over to a lambo, and the last mile in a horse drawn carriage to show their commitment.
But I digress. The event will be visited by heaps of what you would call high consuming types, and as a consequence large emitters of greenhouse gases.
But hey, there also covid in town, so let’s say 10% will catch covid as they toast champagne, and 10% out of those will unfortunately succumb to it.
That alone will result in a substantial cut in greenhouse gas emissions, and that will the effect we can count on.
FromBrussels
FromBrussels
2 years ago
…at least they seem to be having a good time… first to Rome in private and chartered empty planes, bringing the wifies and/or mistresses along,five star wining and dining, then Glasgow…. is Glasgow a nice place ? Dunno, but there must be more interesting places, like rrrmm, Sydney maybe? Better than Glasgow anyway… and what about Buenos Aires , got a nice ring to it, refining tango skills in the typical milongas, yep that s a good idea for COP 27  … climate conferences must be great, all things well considered…. 
RonJ
RonJ
2 years ago
“I don’t want my granddaughters to grow up and say that the planet is hell and I didn’t do enough to avoid it.”
The planet has always been hell. The ancient European Empires attacked each other. The Romans had gladiators fight to the death for entertainment. Gengis Khan got some 40 million people killed. The Black Plague. The Spanish Conquistadors rampaging through Central American Empires. The American Revolution/Civil War/Indian Wars. World War 1/The Great Depression/World War 2. Two years of Covid-19.
What’s next?
FromBrussels
FromBrussels
2 years ago
Reply to  RonJ
Those were the days !
Agave
Agave
2 years ago
Sea level to rise by 5 feet at least, but I’ll be dead by then so whoooooo cares? Yipee!
Big money and Joe Manchin are going to ensure that very little gets done, at least in the next decade. They have their secluded escape estates all ready to go.
A few years back, the maga cult and supporters tried to make fun of the reality community by latching onto the warning that there were about 12 years before the damage became nearly impossible to reverse from longer term damage. So they bleated that we were saying the world was all over and done with in 12 years, ha ha stupid libtards. Typical ignorance and intentional disinformation from the conspiracy crowd.
I don’t have a lot of optimism that this will be solved to a degree that will prevent major upheaval, starvation, and migration disasters as things worsen over the coming many decades. So I just try to minimize my impact and encourage all to vote for the pro-democracy/pro-living environment party (Dems) while they still can. Who knows, maybe a miracle is still in the works. Slow motion crises are not easy to deal with, especially among the doubters or those whose fortune depends on it. Some of the things I’ve read by highly credible experts are not at all comforting, but I’ve no need to repeat them when the alarm will be widely dismissed anyway. Have to spend my limited time on trying to stop red state legislatures from stealing the next elections and installing a federal autocracy in the meantime.
Eddie_T
Eddie_T
2 years ago
Reply to  Agave
Another alarmist headline from a cherry-picked study, this one out of Rutgers, and based on some rather shaky assumptions that predict far worse outcomes than even the IPCC. Judith Curry, working for people who actually pay money for honest assessments, debunked it months ago now.
As in most things these days, you can’t just use journalism to get at the truth, because most journalists are really campaigners.
TexasTim65
TexasTim65
2 years ago
Nothing meaningful is going to happen from these accords. If we do manage to cut back emissions it’s going to be because technology has become sufficiently advanced to allow us to use alternate sources of energy.
It’s basically impossible to get the average person to do more than lip service about the Co2 future when they need to put food on the table and heat/cool their home today. Only after all that is satisfied and secured for today and the immediate future will the average person start to do more than lip service.
Eddie_T
Eddie_T
2 years ago
I view Greta Thunberg as a convenient poster child for the more radical climate campaigners, like Extinction Rebellion’s Roger Hallam, which is unfortunate.  He is not somebody I view as reality based……although in a world under the heavy influence of social media, he is an outsize influence, as is Greta.
But fwiw Mish, Greta Thunberg is apparently smart enough to get the big picture. She doesn’t see it much different than you do.
In an interview shortly before the 2021  in Glasgow, Thunberg, asked how optimistic she was that the conference could achieve anything, responded “Nothing has changed from previous years really. The leaders will say ‘we’ll do this and we’ll do this, and we will put our forces together and achieve this’, and then they will do nothing. Maybe some symbolic things and creative accounting and things that don’t really have a big impact. We can have as many COPs as we want, but nothing real will come out of it.”She called Chinese president  “a leader of a dictatorship” and said that “democracy is the only solution to the climate crisis, since the only thing that could get us out of this situation is … massive public pressure.”
Doug78
Doug78
2 years ago
Reply to  Eddie_T
Greta is manufactured. Nothing more to say about her except that she is living the high life and will say and do anything to stay in it. 
StukiMoi
StukiMoi
2 years ago
Not making use of available energy just laying there ready to be used, when people are straight up starving specifically because they lack access to sufficient energy, is an awful lot less likely, than all the “nuclear powers” just deciding the world would be a better place without nukes, so they all destroy them. Or starving guys in coastal cities not fishing, just because overfishing is a problem on a global scale. Neither of those happened. Neither will not burning ready made fuel. Every drop of oil not burned by some Tesla driving San Franciscan, will instead be burned by some African militiaman. Or Asian woman whose kids are about to freeze to death.
Downside is, if the latest scare about decomposable-if-thawed matter in the arctics currently trapping enormous amounts of carbon turns out to be real, it cold get a god but hotter before things stabilize.
Of course, the upside is: Life on earth got by perfectly well with jungles in Alaska. And it’s not as if progressives dumb enough to fall for the trivial nonsense that central banks serve some sort of positive purpose, is nearly as advanced a lifeform as the dinosaurs who cruised around making plenty more sense back then.
whirlaway
whirlaway
2 years ago
Reply to  StukiMoi
“Life on earth got by perfectly well with jungles in Alaska. “

Of course, it will.  The earth will support multicellular life for another 800 million to 1 billion years.  The question is what happens to human civilization, whose existence is predicated on the assumption that we don’t see any drastic climatic change.  

StukiMoi
StukiMoi
2 years ago
Reply to  whirlaway
“The question is what happens to human civilization….”
It ended. Couldn’t survive the utter destructiveness of the theft experiment referred to as central banking.
“…whose existence is predicated on the assumption that we don’t see any drastic climatic change.”
So much for for flexibility and adaptability….. Humans, not just as in different members of humanity, but indeed the same darned humans, currently travel from the tropics to the poles; seemingly thriving in both environs. It would take some real serious climate change to end humans as a life form. And since there simply exist no less civilized way of organizing possible human societies than the  financialized progressivism of today…. : As long as there are humans, the “civilization” part of “human civilization” will at least not be any less existant than it is today. Some degrees plus or minus the summer of ’68 have precious little bearing on anything.

Stay Informed

Subscribe to MishTalk

You will receive all messages from this feed and they will be delivered by email.