A resounding failure as in Copenhagen in 2009? Historic success like in Paris in 2015? Between the two ? The last UN climate conference inspired all of these feelings and, as humanity tries to save itself, the time for concrete action has come.
On the one hand, the Swedish activist Greta Thunberg lambasting in front of more than 100,000 young people gathered in Glasgow a “greenwashing festival”. On the other, experts familiar with climate negotiations welcoming solid, even historic, advances in the fight against global warming.
And in the middle, many observers who oscillate between approval and criticism, between hope and despair in the face of the results of this COP26 in Glasgow which was seen as crucial for the future of humanity.
“The Glasgow Climate Pact is more than we expected, but less than we hoped for,” said Dann Mitchell, of the UK’s Met Office weather service.
A not-so-surprising in-between when it comes to the fight for the climate. Is such a measure or such a commitment real progress or, on the contrary, an inadequate response? It all depends on how you measure.
Thus, compared to what existed before this COP, the first call from some 200 countries to reduce the use of coal, or the pledge to double the annual financial assistance intended for the adaptation of poor countries to disasters, are progress. important.
Just like the encouragement to submit by the end of 2022 more ambitious commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
But these hard-won victories at COP26 seem modest in view of the scientific findings and the consequences of the climate crisis already tangible on the ground.
“Exit ramp”
Throughout the year 2021, across the planet, humans have experienced in their flesh the ferocity of fires, floods and heat waves called to multiply with the rise in temperature.
When they arrived in Glasgow, the world was therefore determined to do everything to respect the most ambitious objective of the Paris Agreement: to limit warming to 1.5 ° C compared to the pre-industrial era, to avoid the worst when every tenth of a degree counts.
“As an optimist, for Glasgow, I see the glass as half full rather than half empty,” comments Alden Meyer of the E3G think tank.
“But the atmosphere responds to emissions, not to COP decisions, and much remains to be done to translate strong speeches into reality.”
The red alert launched in August by the UN climate experts (IPCC) is clear. In 3000 pages, they go through all the physical data of climate science, finding no good news.
It is therefore probable that warming will reach the threshold of + 1.5 ° C around 2030; that ocean levels are rising faster than expected; that the natural “carbon sinks” of forests, soils and oceans are showing signs of weakness. The risk of “points of no return” is already threatening ecosystems essential to climate balance, such as the Amazon, which could turn into savannah or the permafrost of the Arctic, this always frozen ground which, by melting, could release water. immense volumes of CO2 and methane.
“Make no mistake, we are still on the road to hell,” warns Dave Reay, head of the Climate Change Institute in Edinburgh. “But at least Glasgow has created an exit ramp.”
“Science-based goals”
The second part of the IPCC report, focusing on the impacts of global warming, of which AFP obtained a preliminary version before its publication in February 2022, highlights another gap between Glasgow’s progress and long-term needs: aid to poor countries.
Thus, according to this text, helping the most vulnerable countries to cope with the devastating impacts of global warming will quickly require trillions of dollars per year. Much more than the 100 billion per year promised by rich countries to developing countries from 2020, a promise still not kept.
After this COP and in the face of increasing disasters, the climate issue will certainly remain on the front page between now and COP27 at the end of 2022 in Egypt.
The continuation of this disaster saga will depend to a large extent on the four main emitters, responsible for 60% of global emissions (United States, China, European Union, and India), called upon to do more to reduce their emissions.
But also the private sector which according to some observers is entering a major transformation with private capital starting to flow to begin the necessary decarbonisation of all sectors of the economy.
In Glasgow, the former Governor of the Bank of England Mark Carney thus assured that “the money is there if the world wants to use it”, by presenting an alliance of 500 banks, insurers and asset managers representing 130 trillion dollars.
But some scientists doubt that the market alone can be the solution, if governments do not play their part.
“We cannot wait for market incentives to bear fruit,” comments Johan Rockstrom, director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research. “We have to put a price on carbon globally, we have to put in place science-based goals that are turned into laws.”