Camille Éienne points to several inaccuracies in the text. “If we look at the text and the last version that was published, we see differences in the words, for example, for the exit from coal, the day before, India and China pushed for the decision to exit from the coal turns into “reduction” “, she explains. Also, it points to a lack of ambition on deadlines, in particular on the agreement to end deforestation in 2030. “It includes 10 years of destroying these trees, which are the natural solution to store carbon in the soil “, deplores the ecologist.
On the methane side, many leaders are congratulating themselves on a historic agreement. However, by leaning a little more on the text, the activist emphasizes that he only mentions gas leaks. Agriculture and animal husbandry are not mentioned. Yet, she insists, these are the “main sources of methane emissions “.
“Even if this COP was the scene and the place of big announcements, of full coalitions, of commitments, if all the States kept their current commitments, we would be on a trajectory of 1.8 ° C “, explains Camille. Problem: no country, except The Gambia, has followed this trajectory. She reminds us that the difference between 1.5 ° C and 2 ° C is not to be taken lightly: it puts millions of lives at risk. “There are countries, like Mozambique, like Barbados, like the Maldives, like Kenya, which are doomed in these few degrees of gap “, worries the ecologist.
While the leaders are pleased to include the issue of loss and damage in the text, Camille sees a “failure“and points to the absence of concrete actions. For example, it pleads for the establishment of financial compensation for the countries of the South which pay the consequences of the significant emissions of the countries of the North.