The abandonment of oil and gas is conspicuous by its absence in the draft agreement published Monday at the 26e United Nations climate conference (COP26), but the Canadian Minister of Environment and Climate Change is not moved.
“It is a negotiating text that will change 40 times by the end of the week,” he told Press, who joined him in Glasgow, Scotland, where he heads the Canadian delegation.
The draft was described as “weak” by the environmental organization Greenpeace, which stressed in a statement that the mention of fossil fuels is systematically blocked by the same countries, from conference to conference.
“What is very concerning here in Glasgow is that the first draft of the text is already exceptionally weak, when usually it starts with some ambition, which is then watered down,” said the managing director of the organization, Jennifer Morgan.
The advances are nevertheless notable, estimates Minister Guilbeault, who recalls that the planet was heading before the Paris agreement towards a warming of “3.6 or 3.7 ℃”, then of 2.7 ℃ before COP26, and now 1.8 ℃ with the recent commitments announced.
“We are getting closer and closer to our goal,” which is to limit global warming to 1.5 ℃, he said.
Fossil fuel lobbyists
Minister Guilbeault relativizes the presence of representatives of the fossil industry in the Canadian delegation to COP26, after an analysis revealed Monday that no less than 503 lobbyists linked to fossil fuels are participating in the conference, including some within national delegations.
“If the fossil fuel lobby were a country, it would have the largest delegation to the COP,” lamented in a statement the group of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that carried out the analysis, including Global Witness.
Only two people from the Alberta delegation, included in the Canadian delegation, can be qualified as representatives of the petroleum industry, says Minister Guilbeault, who believes that this industry should also be part of the conversation on solutions. to bring to the climate crisis.
“All industries need to do better on climate change, and this is especially true for the oil and gas industry,” he said, downplaying their ability to delay negotiations.
If there are people who think that they have come here to tell us that we must not fight against climate change, these will be very short conversations.
Steven Guilbeault, Canadian Minister of Environment and Climate Change
Équiterre deplores the presence of so many representatives of the fossil fuel industry, while access to the conference proved very difficult for delegates from developing countries, particularly affected by the climate crisis.
“When the house is on fire, why do we keep inviting arsonists to dinner and, on top of that, deciding on the menu? », Indignant Émile Boisseau-Bouvier, analyst in climate policies and ecological transition of the Quebec environmental organization.
Ministers take the stage
The technical negotiations of the last week will give way to political negotiations, which should make it possible to advance more difficult points, predicts Steven Guilbeault, whose nights should shorten.
“The ministers will be more and more busy over the next few days to hopefully reach an agreement by Friday,” he explains, saying “cautiously optimistic”.
The atmosphere is quite positive. There is no red flag so far.
Steven Guilbeault
He added that the success of COP26 does not only go through the negotiation, although very important, of the final text.
“There are many other things happening here, in parallel and on the sidelines of the negotiations,” he says, referring to sectoral agreements such as the one on the reduction of methane emissions.
The issue of offset credits
Among the subjects that “hang” in the negotiations, Minister Guilbeault evokes transparency and accountability, loss and damage, human rights as well as offset credits.
These emissions trading are heavily criticized because they are seen by many observers as a way to avoid real reductions in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
“This is why we need robust rules”, in particular to avoid the “double counting” of reductions, says Steven Guilbeault, who recalls that such mechanisms exist, citing the Common Carbon Exchange of Quebec and California.
He also stresses that countries have no interest in betting on offsetting their emissions by acquiring credits, because they would divert these funds from their economies.
“This idea that a country could say ‘I’m going to pay a lot of money so that others make reductions and have all the social and environmental benefits. [qui s’y rattachent] and me, the cellar, all I’m going to do is pay, pay, pay “seems to me a funny strategy”, launches the minister.