Fossil fuels at COP28: The good, the bad, and the uphill battle
The conclusion of the recent COP28 negotiations has left many feeling confused. While the ‘historic agreement’ that finally mentioned fossil fuels has been lauded by some climate activists, it has been lambasted by others as overly weak, and dominated by big oil interests. This article will focus on key highlights, lowlights, and upcoming work we have seen from the COP28 final agreement. Check out our article on Loss and Damage at COP28 for the announcement that made news on the first day of COP28 proceedings.
The good
Although it wasn’t everything we had hoped for, there were some significant wins at COP28. The final statement agreed by the parties was the first ever to explicitly name fossil fuels as the source of climate change and call for transition away from them. It is astonishing it has taken this long, but is a sign of real progress. Although the statement does not force action by any parties, it does send a clear message to policymakers, investors, and business that a transition away from fossil fuels is on the horizon, which will hopefully reinforce global efforts to reduce emissions. The commitment to transitioning away from fossil fuels can be seen as a win for stewardship – kaitiakitanga.
The bad
Despite the mention of fossil fuel transition the statement has come under fire, both for what it includes and what it doesn’t. The final text of the agreement has been criticised for including ‘loopholes’ to allow further fossil fuel use – for instance, the list of emissions-reduction technologies includes Carbon Capture, Utilisation and Storage (CCUS), an unproven and expensive technology that oil producers claim can offset the emissions from fossil fuels. Further, the agreement explicitly recognises the role of ‘transition fuels’ (considered to refer to natural gas) in the global energy transition, providing an excuse to legitimise the trillions of dollars globally being invested to scale up extraction of this fossil fuel.
Coal and other fossil fuels continue to receive trillions in subsidies, while climate finance is considered ‘too expensive’.
As well as explicitly including these potential loopholes, the agreement fails to include strong enough language. The agreement calls for a phase-out of fossil fuel subsidies, yet the same promise was made by the G20 in 2009, and last year the world spent $13 million every minute on fossil fuel subsidies. While trillions of dollars are being invested to expand fossil fuel production, and emissions continue to increase, the phrase “transitioning away from fossil fuels” is seen as far too weak by many who have been working for a total phase-out. The Association of Small Island States (AOSIS), which includes 15 Pacific Island nations, had lobbied hard for text referring to a phase-out of fossil fuels, yet they were not even in the room at the time the final agreement was signed off. Before COP28 we highlighted the importance of including the Pacific, and we can see that the failure to do so has led to a much weaker final text.
The uphill battle
The significant achievements at COP28 have been attributed to consistent grassroots pressure by organisations across the globe, an example of the ground-up multilateralism Pope Francis discusses in Laudate Deum. Yet at the same time, corporate oil interests have clearly also influenced the final agreement. What happens now will depend on how these forces interact with governments and communities across the globe.
As a civil society organisation, and generally as people of good will, we are faced with a serious uphill battle. The COP28 agreement gives us points we can use to pressure our governments into action to reduce emissions, phase out fossil fuels, and achieve climate justice. Guided by Catholic social teaching values, we must emphasise subsidiarity – mana whakahaere and participation – nāu te rourou, nāku te rourou, centring and listening to the voices of those most affected by climate change, including our Pacific neighbours through forums such as AOSIS. We must continue the grassroots work ensuring our governments and communities prioritise stewardship, so that technologies such as CCUS are only used to actually reduce emissions, rather than becoming an excuse to facilitate further pollution.
Although the COP28 negotiations dominate the headlines, the struggle for climate justice takes place every day in communities across the globe and particularly in the Pacific. We will continue to focus on supporting local communities across Aotearoa and the Pacific to prepare for and adapt to climate change, and use the COP28 agreement as a basis to continue building momentum for a just transition to a sustainable future.